EP2225748A2 - Professeur pour l'enseignement électronique (e-teaching) pour promouvoir l'apprentissage de matières complexes - Google Patents

Professeur pour l'enseignement électronique (e-teaching) pour promouvoir l'apprentissage de matières complexes

Info

Publication number
EP2225748A2
EP2225748A2 EP08866227A EP08866227A EP2225748A2 EP 2225748 A2 EP2225748 A2 EP 2225748A2 EP 08866227 A EP08866227 A EP 08866227A EP 08866227 A EP08866227 A EP 08866227A EP 2225748 A2 EP2225748 A2 EP 2225748A2
Authority
EP
European Patent Office
Prior art keywords
student
action
teaching
program
tree
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Ceased
Application number
EP08866227A
Other languages
German (de)
English (en)
Inventor
Peter Krumhauer
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Eteacher GbR
Original Assignee
Krumhauer Peter
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Krumhauer Peter filed Critical Krumhauer Peter
Publication of EP2225748A2 publication Critical patent/EP2225748A2/fr
Ceased legal-status Critical Current

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G09—EDUCATION; CRYPTOGRAPHY; DISPLAY; ADVERTISING; SEALS
    • G09B—EDUCATIONAL OR DEMONSTRATION APPLIANCES; APPLIANCES FOR TEACHING, OR COMMUNICATING WITH, THE BLIND, DEAF OR MUTE; MODELS; PLANETARIA; GLOBES; MAPS; DIAGRAMS
    • G09B19/00—Teaching not covered by other main groups of this subclass
    • G09B19/0053—Computers, e.g. programming

Definitions

  • the invention relates to a program system that simulates a teacher who teaches a student in a private lesson a complex program system. Areas of application are all educational areas, from the housewife who wants to learn Word to the graduate engineer who wants to learn a new complex design program.
  • E-teaching belongs to the field of e-leaming. Many different technologies are already known for this, which are used for didactically different representations. The most popular variants are web and computer based training applications, authoring systems, simulations, videoconferencing / teleteaching, learning (content) management systems and digital learning games. All of these technologies are primarily intended to provide the user with material independent of space and time.
  • the aim of the present patent application is therefore to develop a program system that simulates a teacher as completely as possible, easy to use and generate and is also available as a cost-effective teaching option to a wide circle of users. It is intended to give the student as much freedom as possible in the repetition and to help him with errors and difficulties as efficiently as possible.
  • a lesson generally consists of 2 parts: 1. In the first part, the teacher will teach a lesson to the student.
  • the student can repeat the lesson. It verifies the correctness of its actions - if they do not help to solve the lesson's tasks, the student receives an indication of his mistake.
  • an object is any unit of a program system - eg a menu function or also a part of a structure - which can be called up by clicking on it)
  • FIG. 3 shows, as an example, an action tree with AND and OR branches, where AND branches show that they must be performed parallel to the other AND branches, while in OR branches only one of the branches of the action tree is traversed got to.
  • the action tree represents the following overall task:
  • the 3 And branches each represent a cell grouping with its task: • And1:
  • the cell group A1: B1 must first be marked (2 alternative options in OM and Or2 and then bold (And1-1), red (And1-2) and in 15p (And1-3) are formatted
  • the tree view is used for graphical rendering because it reflects the dependencies optically well - for the internal programmer representation, the tabular form is chosen because it is easier to program.
  • the branch And3 would z. B. in this form look like this:
  • FIG. 4 shows the branch And3 of the action tree in FIG. 3 in tabular representation, wherein the branches are represented by the indication of the parent cell. action paths This results in the pursuit of the mothers - the left branch of And3 results (here from bottom to top) z. B.
  • Tree representation and table display can be transferred into each other without loss.
  • FIG. 5 shows the overall task in tabular representation shown in the action tree in FIG. 3:
  • the three table rows show the same subtasks:
  • the enrollment of the student's actions as a parameter of a table is actually the representation of a result of an action, in contrast to the first analysis method where the action itself was analyzed - the second method of registering table parameters can thus be considered as a subform of the result check ,
  • FIG. 6 shows the generation of a formula.
  • this formula there are many possibilities - eg. Eg by marking the formula cell E4 and then • activating the sum symbol
  • results of teachers and students z. B. be analyzed by bitmap comparison.
  • Objects that are to be used for several teaching units are determined in this step. These are z.
  • the menu functions that must be activated and their activation must be recognized by the program based on stored analysis parameters - in Excel for example.
  • the Bold menu function bolds a selected cell content.
  • the object type determines how to recognize which object has been activated by clicking on it. There are different object types for different program systems (with partially specific parameters). B.
  • Pixel Object - its activation is detected by its verification pixels - s. u. • Position Object - it is detected by the fact that the cursor is on activation in an activation field whose vertices are stored
  • Fig. 7a shows the object 'BoId' in the non-active state before the cursor enters the activation area
  • Fig 7b the same object in the active state after the cursor has entered the activation area. It can be seen that individual pixels of the object change their color in the active state. This color change can be used to check if the student has activated this object: 2 (sometimes automatic) pixels with changed color are saved to the object - the 'verification pixels' (see in Fig. 2b the two pixels in the bottom) Frame) and their color on the student's screen compared with the stored colors - they are the same, the student has activated the object.
  • Figure 8a shows the creation of a line in the Solid Edge program that is not exactly horizontal.
  • Figure 8b shows how the horizontal / vertical marker (the symbol next to the line) is automatically added by the program when the end point of the line is at exactly the same height or width as the starting point, therefore the line is exactly horizontal or vertical is. In the case shown, this symbol is always in the same position as the cursor - in other cases it is in the same position as an object.
  • FIG. 9 shows a section of an action tree which describes an action - the formatting of a marked cell or of a cell group - which will occur in several lessons for the program system Excel.
  • Such action units can be combined into one superobject: act Bold2, where Bold2 represents a superobject with the parameter 'condition' (here: if font is not yet active) stored in cell A3.
  • the superobject stores the tree, the name of the superobject, the parameters and their assignment to the tree.
  • FIG. 10 shows a detail of an action tree, which in turn describes a frequent action unit: two ways to mark a cell group.
  • the tree is summarized as a superaction: Mark A1 / B1, where A1 is stored as the start cell in B1 and B1 as the end cell in D5 and Mark is the name of the superaction.
  • FIG. 11 shows an example of an action path with already combined superunits. Again, it is a frequently recurring action: the formatting of a cell assembly. This sequence of actions is in turn combined into a superaction:
  • the menu tree contains all the menu objects of a program system (in FIG. 12, a section of the menu tree of Excel is shown). In addition, the menu tree contains all actions that do not handle objects: The action jnstr Ctrl + Shift + B 'generates z. For example, enter the string Ctrl + Shift + B by key entry and format the selected cell group Bold (bold). Other possibilities of the same function: act BoIdI (B1: the Bold button) or Bold2 (after activating Format and then CeIIs and then - if not already active - Font and then Bold2.
  • Function objects form a special form of the menu objects: they are different objects with the same task - in FIG.
  • the menu objects BoIdI and Bold2 and the string Ctrl + Shift + B perform the same task (to format bold). They form the common function object Bold. act Bold would be the instruction to use one of the three possibilities (shown above) to mark a marked cell or cell group in bold.
  • the menu tree is stored only for the visual display in the form shown above - internally it is also stored in tabular form with naming the respective mother (see above).
  • Fig. 13 shows once again (as already Fig. 5) a simple example of a tabular representation of the tasks.
  • Has z For example, if the student marks cell group B3: E3, then he must format this according to the table in bold (bold).
  • FIG. 12 After the illustration of the menu tree (FIG. 12), he has 3 approaches to the solution through the menu tree. His actions are now checked to see if he takes any of these approaches: act format would z. If, for example, a correct action is taken to solve this problem, one of the three possible solutions can be followed from here. Act Tools would be a wrong action that does not lead to one of the three solutions of the menu tree. You would with the error comment, This would not lead to the solution of the task! ' acknowledged. In the next step would be z. B. act CeIIs a correct action - the analysis program knows the current position in the menu tree (format) and recognizes that the task (the bold formatting) can be achieved via CeIIs.
  • This analysis can be used for every function of the menu tree.
  • the lesson's graphical representation is the lesson graph, which - similar to the unit graph - is a spreadsheet representation of actions and comments. An example of this lesson graph is shown in the section (see Fig. 14 Lesson graph).
  • the Lesson Graph contains sections and comments. Sections are autonomous parts of a lesson that can work out for themselves. They therefore contain their own start screen and all tables that are needed for the process. Lesson comments are assigned to the sections.
  • the control of the actions of the student is based on the fact that the objects of his actions are recognized by the Analyzer program. This is not a problem as long as these are menu items with a known location on the screen. However, it can be a problem when it comes to objects that are generated by the pupil - eg. B. a design drawing. Should z. If lines are to be dimensioned, they must first be activated. To verify that the student has activated the correct object, its parameters must be saved. If the teacher can activate this object z. B. its verification pixels are assigned to the object and stored. However, this is often not possible for the student's objects. Here comes the "Reset the screen '(see above) to bear: After the student has created the drawing and now wants to dimension the teacher intervenes:
  • the analyzer can check this. It is important that this reset takes place only when the previous actions of the student - here the drawing of the rectangle - have been checked!
  • Each lesson is offered - for students with different learning speeds - with different educational progress.
  • These different teaching speeds can z. B. be created in the editing that additional wells inserted or explanatory additions of the teacher when editing are deleted. However, lessons can also be created from the beginning with different teaching speeds.
  • the expected learning speed of the student is determined by a number of questions and assigned to the student profile. If the student makes too many mistakes during the following lessons, or if he can work through the lessons without errors, the learning speed in his profile will be lowered or raised and the lessons for that learning speed will be offered to him.
  • the teaching is based on the following profiles: • The learner's learning speed profile (see above).
  • the target profile of the student is determined by the learner's objective, which he defines at the beginning of the lesson together with a program
  • Each lesson in turn, has its own teaching profile: the sum of the teaching content it conveys.
  • the knowledge profile is adjusted via the protocol of the unit - all teaching contents are entered there together with the quality of their mastery (how many mistakes were there, a recess requested ...) - this then leads back to the current gap and learning speed profile.
  • the current gap profile then becomes the ideal next lesson, as the one whose teaching profile best meets the gaps shown in the gap profile to achieve the learning goal. Creation of the finished teaching unit Generation of the teaching unit graph
  • Fig. 15 shows again (as in Fig. 14) the action path of the teacher. It is easy to see that the action 2 to 8 information is relatively easy to insert into a Zeilverbund table with the following parameters:
  • table parameters can be taken from the lesson path: z.
  • the object 'rectangle' has been marked as a table object with its parameters in a design program in the preparation phase, and it is now invoked in the action path, it will be installed as a new table object and the following actions will be taken. Dimensioning, for example - then create the table parameters for this.
  • the lesson graph represents the teacher's action path with the actions he chooses to solve the tasks of the lesson. However, the student may choose others Choosing solutions - for the analysis of his actions, therefore, the action tree with all possible solutions must be present.
  • This extension can be partially automatic in the following steps:
  • the action path of the lesson graph ( Figures 14 and 15) is examined action by action for whether fragments of the path are complete branches of stored supagacions, superobjects, or menu branches of the menu tree:
  • Fig. 16 shows the automatic extension of the action path of the lesson graph into the condensed representation of the action tree of the lesson graph in 3 steps: 10
  • the 1st and 2nd step - the action path of the lesson graph is shown on the left - bordered are path fragments, also called complete branches of super units (super actions, superobjects or functions) are present:
  • This error comment is generally stored in relation to the action in the action tree (if the action tree analysis is present) or to a parameter in the table set (in the case of the tablet analysis) that is violated by the student's action.
  • composite comments with general and specific comment parts can be used - eg.
  • general elements 'caution' and'is already active ' which is generated whenever the parameter act () is violated and the specific part .Font' of the object associated with the injured object.
  • the commentary is composed: 'caution' + .font '+ .is already active!' Compound parts greatly simplify the entirety of the error comments.
  • the analyzer offers the following help: If the problem occurs in the demonstration phase:
  • the student does not have to wait until the end of the teacher's performance - he can demand the repetition of the one shown so far at any earlier time - in extreme cases, he may also request a single split screen split: Here's a screen for the teacher and one for the student - each action of the teacher is first repeated by the student.
  • the two screens can be arranged next to each other or partially overlap, always one of them is in the foreground. Offer for further training with the same content but without presentation
  • the student After the repetition of the presented teaching unit, the student receives the offer to solve a similar task with the same teaching contents. However, this is not demonstrated by the teacher.
  • the student may choose a setting that stores the protocol of his / her teaching (its action paths, errors, and communication with the analyzer) and automatically sends it over the Internet to the developer of the lesson from time to time. There they are automatically evaluated and then serve to improve the teaching units.
  • a common source of error in program systems is that the test is done by the same developers or by people from the same company who have similar levels of knowledge as the developer. It often results that the testers do not recognize the potential difficulties of the user.
  • Fig. 1 Representation of an action in the unit graph
  • Fig. 2 Representation of an action path in the unit graph
  • Fig. 3 Action tree with branches
  • FIG. 5 Table form of the action tree in FIG. 3
  • Fig. 7a Object Bold not activated
  • Fig. 7b Object 'BoId' activated and with 2 verification pixels
  • Fig. 8a non-horizontal line
  • Fig. 8b horizontal line with property symbol. Horizontal, vertical '
  • Fig. 9 Part of an action tree for the superobject Bold2
  • Fig. 10 Part of an Action Tree for the Super Action Mark Fig. 11: Action Path with Super Action and Super Object
  • Fig. 12 Detail of the menu tree
  • Fig. 15 Action path of the lesson Fig .: 16: Automatic extension of the action path into the action tree
  • Fig. 17 teaching unit with And branches

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
  • Computer Hardware Design (AREA)
  • Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Educational Administration (AREA)
  • Educational Technology (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • Electrically Operated Instructional Devices (AREA)
  • Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)

Abstract

L'invention concerne un système de programme qui simule un professeur qui enseigne à un élève, en leçon particulière, un système de programme complexe. Les domaines d'application englobent tous les domaines de formation, depuis la femme de ménage qui veut apprendre des mots, jusqu'à l'ingénieur diplômé qui veut apprendre un nouveau programme de construction complexe. L'invention a en conséquence pour but de développer un système de programme simulant aussi complètement que possible un professeur, qui soit simple à utiliser et à générer et qui constitue en outre une variante d'apprentissage économique pour un large cercle d'utilisateurs. Il doit en outre laisser à l'élève, lors de la répétition, le plus de liberté possible, et pouvoir lui venir en aide le plus efficacement possible, lors de fautes et de difficultés. L'invention concerne en outre un dispositif destiné à générer des programmes d'enseignement, ces programmes étant composés de plusieurs unités d'enseignement individuelles qui sont exécutées individuellement par l'élève.
EP08866227A 2007-12-28 2008-12-23 Professeur pour l'enseignement électronique (e-teaching) pour promouvoir l'apprentissage de matières complexes Ceased EP2225748A2 (fr)

Applications Claiming Priority (5)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
DE102007063345 2007-12-28
DE102008056014 2008-11-05
DE102008056015 2008-11-05
DE102008059172 2008-11-25
PCT/DE2008/002158 WO2009083004A2 (fr) 2007-12-28 2008-12-23 Professeur pour l'enseignement électronique (e-teaching) pour promouvoir l'apprentissage de matières complexes

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
EP2225748A2 true EP2225748A2 (fr) 2010-09-08

Family

ID=40822298

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
EP08866227A Ceased EP2225748A2 (fr) 2007-12-28 2008-12-23 Professeur pour l'enseignement électronique (e-teaching) pour promouvoir l'apprentissage de matières complexes

Country Status (3)

Country Link
EP (1) EP2225748A2 (fr)
DE (1) DE102008064587A1 (fr)
WO (1) WO2009083004A2 (fr)

Family Cites Families (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5432940A (en) * 1992-11-02 1995-07-11 Borland International, Inc. System and methods for improved computer-based training
AU695912B2 (en) * 1994-06-07 1998-08-27 Skillsoft Ireland Limited A computer based training system
US5602982A (en) * 1994-09-23 1997-02-11 Kelly Properties, Inc. Universal automated training and testing software system
US5816820A (en) * 1996-09-18 1998-10-06 Kelly Properties, Inc. Simulation generation system

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
See references of WO2009083004A3 *

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
WO2009083004A4 (fr) 2009-12-17
DE102008064587A1 (de) 2009-08-06
WO2009083004A2 (fr) 2009-07-09
WO2009083004A3 (fr) 2009-10-29

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
DE69938508T2 (de) System, methode und bauteil eines simulationsgestützten rückkoppelungssystems
DE19960050A1 (de) Grafische Benutzerschnittstelle zur Entwicklung von Anwendungsbeispielen unter Verwendung einer Testobjektbibliothek
DE2735065A1 (de) Vorrichtung zur verbesserung eines geistigen eindruckes unter verwendung von computersystemen
DE4332193A1 (de) Verfahren und System zur Verarbeitung und On-Line-Darstellung von Multimedia-Information in einer Baumstruktur
DE212021000416U1 (de) Intelligentes adaptives Hausaufgabensystem, das für das Omo-Lernszenario geeignet ist
Eickelmann Computational Thinking als internationales Zusatzmodul zu ICILS 2018–Konzeptionierung und Perspektiven für die empirische Bildungsforschung
DE102021212276A1 (de) Wissensgetriebenes und selbstüberwachtes system zur fragenbeantwortung
DE4027348C2 (de) Einheitliche Benutzeroberfläche
DE112011100827T5 (de) Echtzeit-Unterrichtssystem
DE4333286C2 (de) Verfahren und Vorrichtung zur Diagnose von Maschinenstörungen
EP2642359A1 (fr) Dispositif de développement et méthode pour créer un programme de calculateur embarqué
DE4100899A1 (de) System fuer die steuerung des ablaufs von testsequenzen in einer informationsverarbeitungsvorrichtung
Ho et al. Pandemic teaching: Using the Allen cell types database for final semester projects in an undergraduate neurophysiology lab course
EP2225748A2 (fr) Professeur pour l'enseignement électronique (e-teaching) pour promouvoir l'apprentissage de matières complexes
EP1862901A1 (fr) Saisie de consignes de programmes pour langages de programmation impératifs
DE10213582A1 (de) Datenberechnungsvorrichtung und Verfahren zur Anwendung der Datenberechnungsvorrichtung zur Einstellung einer elektronischen Steuereinrichtung
DE102009023624A1 (de) System zum Generieren und Vermitteln komplexer Lerninhalte
EP2012227A1 (fr) Interface de programmation destinée à la programmation d'ordinateurs
Baniulis et al. TestTool: Web-based testing, assessment, learning
DE202015009592U1 (de) System zum Steuern des Zugriffs eines Benutzers auf ein elektronisches Gerät
DE19803874C2 (de) Audiovisuelles Lern-, Prüfungs-, und Quizgerät
EP1003142A1 (fr) Procédé de surveillance automatique de la réalisation de buts instructifs par un ordinateur
Krichevsky et al. E-TRIALS
Buerger et al. Beyond professional knowledge: A systematic literature review on attitude-and motivation-related factors influencing the use of digital technology in teaching
DE102014102063A1 (de) Computergestütztes Verfahren und computergestütztes Unterrichtssystem zur Durchführung naturwissenschaftlicher Lehrexperimente, vernetzte Unterrichtsanordnung

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PUAI Public reference made under article 153(3) epc to a published international application that has entered the european phase

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009012

17P Request for examination filed

Effective date: 20100625

AK Designated contracting states

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SI SK TR

AX Request for extension of the european patent

Extension state: AL BA MK RS

RAP1 Party data changed (applicant data changed or rights of an application transferred)

Owner name: ETEACHER GBR

RIN1 Information on inventor provided before grant (corrected)

Inventor name: PETER KRUMHAUER

DAX Request for extension of the european patent (deleted)
17Q First examination report despatched

Effective date: 20110801

17Q First examination report despatched

Effective date: 20110908

REG Reference to a national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: R003

STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN REFUSED

18R Application refused

Effective date: 20130410