WO2023224506A1

WO2023224506A1 - Computer assisted learning system and method

Info

Publication number: WO2023224506A1
Application number: PCT/RO2023/000003
Authority: WO
Inventors: Dorin ISOC
Original assignee: Cybertrainer Ltd
Priority date: 2022-05-16
Filing date: 2023-05-02
Publication date: 2023-11-23
Also published as: RO137798A2

Abstract

The computer-assisted learning system and method are dedicated to the construction of learning or creative activities in the most different forms, with the most different subjects and independent of the language used. The system works connected to an internet network where each participant can act auto-nomously, respecting a program of functional units with the durations set by the activity coordinator through a configuration unit (Ucts) and is made up of a unit for coordinating the learning process (VirTran) which coordinates a number of personalized learning units, equal to the number of real students (Upa_1, Upa_2, Upa_3) also established by configuration by the main instructor and a virtual student (Upa_v) and which internally possesses a base of disputable situations (BSD) which at the end of the learning session is used by a scoring and interpretation unit (Usc&int) to evaluate the activity submitted by each participant and its cen-tralized communication through a communication unit (Ucomm) in the form of a personalized individual report so that it includes the situation of the entire group but only the name of the recipient in clear. The method involves the preparation of the system by configuration by the main instructor through the theme and details of the learning technique, the composition of the learning team and the way of planning the stages of the learning session. Learning takes place only under the leadership of the learning coordination unit (VirTran) configured through the autonomous activity of students posting problems, problem solutions and non-conformity incident reports and through quantitative index value assignment analyzes or reports Written. The main instructor can also participate in the learning activity as a virtual student with restricted rights. All work developed in the learning process is in the form of anonymous files.

Description

Computer assisted learning system and method

This invention is related to a computer-assisted learning system and method for building activities dedicated to the knowledge and skills assimilation or group creation, in the most different forms, with the most different subjects and independent of the language used.

The teacher is a common and traditional person of the world of the school and environments in which learning or imparting knowledge is supposed. With no exception, his/her image corresponds to an individual with a thorough training, able to create situations in which those around him acquire new knowledge or skills of a nature to raise their standard of representation, manipulation, and generation of the means of materialization and operation with creativity products.

The conventional school model assumes a group of individuals, generally called students, a person, generically called a teacher, who is responsible for the organization of the group and the organization of the learning activity with the aim of acquiring, in each interval, a predetermined volume of knowledge and skills. Traditionally, the activity of the group and the teacher takes place in a common space, called the classroom. It is also assumed that the teacher establishes the topic of the activity, the application problems to be solved, stimulates, and mediates the learning activity, is the one who establishes the bibliography and assesses the solutions offered to the proposed problems. Based on the students’ results and answers, the teacher makes their individual assessment.

The evolution of information processing technology, the democratization of access to writings, the development and spread of media resources allowed the youth an early and noninstitutionalized access to the same resources that only the teacher used previously (Isoc and Isoc, 2010), determined multiple attempts to change or improve the essence of the school.

A series of authors have tried to diagnose the failures of the education system and the essence of their conclusions point to the teacher-student relationship. In a simplified statement, true learning occurs when the process is “student-oriented.”

Weimer’s work lays out the courses of action for “...learning-oriented instruction...”, a concept proposed instead of “student-oriented instruction...”: a) achieving a new redistributed balance of power that distorts the learning project; b) rethinking the relationship between the content to be learned and the learning process with the aim of approaching and becoming aware of learning; c) the need to change the teacher’s role in the activation of the learning process. The teacher’s role must be passive, without interventions, and the student is the one who discovers the way to learning through his actions. d) the responsibility for learning is solely the student’s; e) assessment must have a purpose and this purpose must serve learning. (Weimer, 2002)

A collaborative learning system is also known (USA 8,019,718) which involves several users who can intervene by modifying the learning problem through actions of addition, mo- dification, elimination. In its structure, the system assumes a collaboration engine, a reconci- liation engine, a management engine. Also, the system includes an application for analyzing electronic sources with the role of identifying similarities. The volume of information thus constructed is entrusted to the teacher who uses conventional presentation and teaching tech- niques with the aim of its assimilation by those who learn.

The disadvantages of the method reside in the relativity of building the learning topic to a stated goal and in the fact that it amplifies the individual efforts of the teacher who is subject to an unpredictable volume of knowledge to be processed, understood, and transmitted for assimilation.

The collaboration between learners is primarily viewed as a quantitative assessment (Weimer, 2002). Such a system assists users in performing common tasks and then dissemi- nating the results of their activity.

The disadvantage of this method is that the initiative of the learners is limited, their efforts are not evaluated and the target of the learning process is not defined or identified.

Most learning methods are based on the principle of finding an expected solution to a given problem (US 5,577,919). Based on the solution selected by the student from a group of possible solutions, an apparent level of knowledge acquisition or knowledge of a problem under discussion is evaluated.

The disadvantages of these methods consist in the significant effort of the instructor to find credible sets of representative problems and possible solutions and in the neglect of the student’s efforts to learn from other activities related to the process of associating solutions to the problems presented for learning and evaluation.

A representative solution for the traditional school comprises a group student base, a learning materials base, and an assessment base (USA 6,915,104). Each student’s skill level can improve during operation. The duration of learning is limited and the evaluation is based on a specially developed evaluation material. Dealing with students involves a set of indivi- dual personal information. The coordination of the learning process is done under the action of the teacher. Testing is based on a set of problems prepared by the teacher.

The disadvantages of this solution consist in avoiding the connections between students intended to emphasize collaborative learning and the accumulation of autonomous work skills directed by solving real problems.

Collaborative learning delivery systems are also known (USA 9,971,753, USA 10,573,194) which present learning material on connected terminals for students. Students can make comments that are shared within the learning group. The processing unit associated with each student evaluates the comments in relation to the learning material with a pre-set threshold or sets quizzes to check how knowledge is acquired.

The disadvantage of the solution is that the evaluation is done in relation to the pre- sented and known text of the learning material.

A common technical and pedagogical direction is the problem-solving method (USA 5,940,817, USA 5,878,214). In general, the existence of this technique provides significant behavioral flexibility. At the time of application, to find a plan, we talk about a set of solu- tions that meet for a set of problems and the technical solution aims for an optimal association. Problem solving methods involve collaboration within a work group. The collaboration develops under the coordination of a facilitator who also ensures the initiation of the dialogue through which the resulting solutions are explained.

The disadvantage of the solution is that it only assumes correct problem-solution sets and omits the existence of cases where the matching relativity is high, situations often encountered in real life.

A solution that evaluates how learning occurs is premised on how some elements of a given set of elements are identified (USA 6,419,496 Bl). In this way a hierarchy of recog- nition times is formed which could be a measure of learning.

The disadvantage of the solution is the limited and repetitive character of the learning process which has nothing to do with a natural intention to broaden the learning horizon.

The learning process is integrated into didactic activity management systems (USA 8,187,004) in which each student, instructor or administrator accumulates information that can give an image of the school’s activity.

The disadvantage of these solutions lies in the fact that the integration has a formal character in which the student-instructor functional relationship is treated superficially.

A solution for the automation of the learning process uses the concepts of technical adaptive control where the teacher’s role is preserved with a series of new attributes (Isoc and Isoc, 2010).

The functional disadvantages of the suggested ensemble appear because of keeping the student-teacher structure of the traditional school.

The problem that the invention solves is the construction of a functional assembly with information processing resources that coordinates the autonomous activity of a group of stu- dents in the learning process and that is intended for the integration and automation of group learning techniques by solving problems and by collegial collaboration.

The assisted learning system according to the invention removes the above disadvan- tages because:

- To assist learning, a unique structure of activities is used, consisting of a set of writing, and posting of the problem - analysis of the posted problem - solution of the posted pro- blem - analysis of the solution of the posted problem.

- In order to automate the learning assistance action, the interaction of the participants is separated in such a way that the learning process is configured by the main instructor through subjects, technical support, the composition of the learning group and the plan- ning of the stages of the learning session after which the learning process is fully coordi- nated by a unit from coordinating learning to generating reports to evaluate each partici- pant’s activity.

For the personalized active participation of each member of the learning group in the trai- ning process, the interventions of the participants have an exclusively written format, in the form of non-modifiable files (pdf.) from the moment of uploading and posting.

- To access the assistance system facilities in conditions where users have established mul- tiple roles with interspersed interventions, authentication for accessing the system appli- cation leads active users to an adaptive control panel that has the operating bodies detailed in relation to the activated facilities and the time at which the intervention takes place according to the configured reference moments of the session.

- To assist the learning for each activity, participants are authorized to intervene in relation to the activity previously carried out, in such a way that any favorable or unethical influ- ences are eliminated from the start.

To assist learning, it is organized in episodes called learning sessions with predefined acti- vities and configurable time durations at the initiative of the main instructor. - For student-oriented learning, the support system offers personalized interfaces that allow active user access to contributions posted by all participants, i.e., problem texts, analysis reports and problem solutions, and ways to express personal options as numerical values of appreciation of each quality, problem opportunity, solution usability or incident seve- rity for these contributions.

- To assess the efforts and results of each student during a learning session, the assistance system offers the possibility of automatic integration of individual options and their inter- pretation in the form of rules with a uniform format.

- To assist learning, the system provides, through reports communicated by e-mail for each learning session, for each participant, the results of the completed activities so that there is a picture of the entire team with customization for the receiving participant.

- To restrict the instructor’s access to the learning activity, the system provides him with the facilities of a certain student, known as a virtual student, and his activity is evaluated in the same unitary way as that of other students.

The advantages of the invention are that it reduces the teacher-student relationship to an instructor-student relationship through which only the characteristics necessary for the lear- ning process are preserved, that the efforts of the instructor are significantly reduced, that the learning process is intensified and oriented towards the real requirements of the student in relation to the subject of training, that through social responsibility interventions learning becomes more complete, that the process of automatic simultaneous evaluation of all students becomes unitary, objective and effective.

An embodiment of the invention is given next and in connection with Fig. 1...Fig. 35 which present:

Fig. 1 - explanatory of the reticular structure of the learning process by using the assisted learning service.

Fig. 2 - explanatory to the definition of the arbitrated disputable situation used in assisted learning.

Fig. 3 - example of logical interaction of the participants in the learning process according to the stages of the session and the way of forming active teams in serving a Sds standard disputable situation.

Fig. 4 - block diagram of the learning support system.

Fig. 5 - explanatory of the relationship between the stages of the learning session, the actors of the activities and the moments of planning the activity in the process under the con- trol of the assisted learning system. Fig. 6 - the temporal evolution of all work stages of a learning session, including the stages of arbitration and personal valorization.

Fig. 7 - example of a schedule with multiple interventions in stage E1 and the distribution of interventions among the students of the learning team.

Fig. 8 - the control panel of the active user with multiple roles (learning provider, guest instructor, authorized instructor, virtual student, authority instructor);

Fig. 9 - the control panel of the active user with the student role in configured and/or launched learning sessions;

Fig. 10 - block diagram of the Upai_i custom interface unit of the assistance system.

Fig. 11 - example of the learning interface at the launch of the E4 intervention, before the selection of the disputable work situation with the detailing of its component elements.

Fig. 12 - example of the learning interface when launching intervention E4, after choosing a selectable disputable situation.

Fig. 13 - example of a learning interface when launching intervention E4, after choosing a selectable disputable situation and an operation specific to the ongoing intervention.

Fig. 14 - example of the learning interface when launching the E4 intervention after choosing a selectable disputable situation, with the activation of an operation allowed in the ongoing intervention and the launch of the operation steps bar.

Fig. 15 - example of the learning interface when launching the E4 intervention, after selecting the disputable work situation, with the activation of an operation allowed in the ongoing intervention and the launch of the steps bar in completion to confirm the activated steps.

Fig. 16 - example of the learning interface at the launch of the E4 intervention, after the com- pletion of the ongoing operation with the entry in the image-panel of the information entered by the active user.

Fig. 17 - general sequence of actions of a learning session stage intervention.

Fig. 18 - unfolded logic diagram and interactions within a learning session.

Fig. 19 - the inclusion of the assisted learning system in an automatic learning system, with human adaptation, piloted.

Fig. 20 - the interactions of the upload-post intervention and problem management;

Fig. 21 - the interactions of the intervention of the analysis of the problems of the posted con- tributions;

Fig. 22 - interactions of the loading-posting intervention and management of posted contri- butions;

Fig. 23 - the interactions of the arbitration- validation intervention of the group’s opinion on a reported incident of non-conformity;

Fig. 24 - the interactions of the upload-post operation of a contribution;

Fig. 25 - interactions of the operation to remove a posted contribution;

Fig. 26 - interactions of the operation of assigning an criterion in a stage of analysis of a posted contribution;

Fig. 27 - interactions of the reporting operation of a compliance incident regarding a posted contribution;

Fig. 28 - interactions of the arbitration- validation operation of the learning group’s opinion regarding an incident reported on a posted contribution;

Fig. 29 - an example of centralizing the results of a learning session.

Fig. 30 - example of completing the session results for the S1 student in the E1 stage.

Fig. 31 - example of completing the session results for the S1 student in the E2 stage.

Fig. 32 - example of completing the session results for the S1 student in the E3 stage.

Fig. 33 - example of completing the session results for the S1 student in the E4 stage.

Fig. 34 - explanatory for the generation of the set of rules for the interpretation of the learning session.

Fig. 35 - the sequence of steps to build the learning session status interpretation report.

1. Terminology, notations

Learning session: scheduled duration of a process of assisted assimilation of knowledge and skills from the moment of accessibility of the topic offered by an instructor until the moment when the learning process can be evaluated.

Session stage: well-defined fraction of time in a session that has a specific purpose in orga- nizing the learning process. A learning session has several stages.

Intervention: a sum of assisted individual efforts that is delimited by a voluntary entry into and exit from the assisted learning system. A session step can have one or more inter- ventions.

Activity: a sum of individual assisted efforts with a specific purpose and allowing scoring according to the principles of the assisted learning system.

Operation: the technical way by which the assisted learning system facilitates the realization of an activity.

Action or step: a sum of individual and assisted efforts that have an expected effect on the functioning of the assisted learning system. An operation is broken down into actions / steps. Session support: written document specifying the topic of a learning process and details on how to write the problems and/or solutions that the students participating in this process can identify, as well as other specific work rules do the activity menu to which the lear- ning refers (notation, Supp).

Teacher: a qualified person who teaches an educational subject and who uses lecturing in front of students and guidance in his work.

Lead instructor: qualified person empowered to organize a learning process for a team of students (notation M_tra). The power of attorney can come from some institution or or- ganization or it can be a personal undertaking. The instructor, whatever his rank, does not necessarily have the authority to present the subject matter to the students through lec- tures, let alone give written recommendations of an indicative nature.

Facilitator: person responsible for the activity of a team of collaborators.

Opportunity index: numerical value in the range [0..1] by which a person expresses his interest in a certain advertised subject (notation, Opp).

Usability index: numeric value in the range [0...1] associated with a person’s satisfaction with how he understands a solution developed for a presented problem (notation, Usa).

Severity index: numerical value in the range [0...1] by which a person appreciates the degree of seriousness of a reported and argued antisocial act (notation Sevp, for severity for the problem, respectively Sevs, for severity for the solution).

Incident: situation that violates compliance rules or other explicit rules specified in writing by the lead instructor regarding how to conduct a learning session. According to the nature of the situation, we speak of a problem incident (Pi) or a solution incident (Si), as the object referred to is a problem or a solution contained in a disputable situation.

Intervention: a sequence of steps that the active user performs between accessing the system through authentication and leaving it voluntarily, in the same stage of the learning session.

Operation: a predefined set of elemental interactions, chosen by the active user, with the aim of achieving a predefined desired effect.

Operation step or action: an elementary interaction ordered by the service and performed by the active user.

Learning team: a set of real people Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3,... together with a virtual student Stud_v aimed at acquiring knowledge and skills that each of them wants with a personal motivation.

Operating area: The surface of the learning interface where the active user can engage options or actions. The operating area consists of the image-panel, the operation bar, the Logout option (the option to leave the service). The options bar is part of an operation along with the Cancel option to exit the current operation.

2. Operation principles

The assisted learning system refers to a team of people who are included in a learning process and reach the acquisition of the desired information or skills through individual efforts, piloted by the topic imposed by the main instructor M_tra and directed by the actions convergent of other members of the team.

Fig. 1 shows a functional reconfiguration of the conventional relationship between the teacher and the students in the assisted learning process. The reconfiguration is possible if it is considered that a traditional teacher plays three roles that can be functionally separated: a role of M_tra main instructor, who ensures the organization of the learning process, an authority instructor role A_tra that arbitrates the activity in which decisions are imposed within the learning team and a virtual student role, Stud_v for situations where the instructor’s person is integrated into the actual learning relationships.

Thus, the conventional teacher is replaced by a learning process coordination unit, VirTran, and his person is integrated into the learning process through the role of a virtual student, Stud_v. Communication relationships with reference to all team members, i.e., Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3, including the virtual student Stud_v, become decisive and the whole learning process appears as a reticular structure. This new configuration is devoid of a rigid hierarchy by eliminating secondary and hierarchical communication relationships during the learning process.

The coordination unit of the learning process VirTran assures the totality of bidirec- tional functional transfers between the participants Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3, Stud_v, sepa- rately, with the authority instructor A_tra and a one-way connection with the main instructor M_tra.

Fig. 2 describes the assisted learning activity is described as a way of treating, stimu- lating, exploiting disputable situations. A disputable situation Sds represents a way to present a specific problem-solution pair used by problem-solving learning techniques. The learning activity is based on a topic and a duration of work called a learning session.

Assisted learning requires a specific organization of the basic learning activity. For this, the learning is organized in uniform activity modules in which each student takes turns, in the desired volume, in relation to the stated subject of the learning a) an identification of the aspects to be learned followed by an elaboration of problems, the posting in an accessible format, activity to which an automatic work step is associated, called stage E1, b) an analysis of some posted problems, activity to which an automatic work stage is associated, called stage E2, c) an elaboration of solutions for certain selected problems, an activity to which an auto- matic work step is associated, called stage E3, d) an analysis of some solutions for posted problems, activity to which an automatic work step is associated, called stage E4. The ensemble of the arbitrated learning activity Sda is formed based on a standard disputable situation, Sds.

In the real assisted learning session, we work with arbitrated disputable situations, Sda. The assisted learning session includes two types of activities. The assisted learning session includes the core activities that relate to a standard disputable situation, Sds and a set of sup- porting learning activities. The supporting learning activities are the arbitration-validation of the posted problem analysis, also called E2x, the arbitration- validation of the posted problem solution analysis, also called E4x, respectively the one of personal valorization, also called E5.

The E2x and E4x arbitration stages are intended to strengthen the E2 and E4 analysis activities respectively in the situations where the latter make use of incident reports.

The personal evaluation stage E5 aims to effectively inform the students participating in the assisted learning process.

The chaining of assisted activity stages comprises two distinct sequences. These sequences are made up of stages E1 and E2, respectively stages E3 and E4, between which stages E2x, respectively E4x and E5 are interspersed. Interleaving occurs with the interrup- tion of neighboring activities followed by their resumption.

As an embodiment, steps E1, E2, E3, E4 and E5 are addressed by the student parti- cipants in the learning process, and steps E2x and E4x are left to the authority instructor.

The effects of the stages of the learning session are posted for the knowledge of all authorized participants.

Fig. 3 represents the interaction of a set of participants, such as Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3, Stud_v in the process of treating a standard disputable situation, Sds.

The construction of a disputable situation is conditioned by the relationship of an indi- vidual, through the inter-environment of his individual training, with an imposed learning topic. Faced with an imposed learning topic, the individual identifies in the support of the session or in its vicinity, subtopics that he does not know or does not master. These subtopics, individually formulated or particularized, become problems, and determine a contentious situation within a given learning team. The treatment of a disputable Sds standard situation is conditioned by the activity of the participants in the learning process, by the way of synchronizing these activities and then by evaluating the contribution of the participants to the learning effort.

Table 1. The set of rules that condition a Stu participant’s relationships to the learning session with the activities it can perform.

The interaction occurs under the coordination of a set of rules of an equivalent logical unit of action of the assistance system, Uloge. This unit acts to select the set of participants through some switches, Ke11, Ke12, Ke13, Ke1v, then Ke21, Ke22, Ke23, Ke2v and again Ke31, Ke32, Ke33, Ke3v, respectively Kev1, Kev2, Kev3, Kevv to form some active teams of learning team members who have the right to participate in the activities of the stages of the standard disputable situation, according to the rules of Table 1.

As an example, it can be considered that a problem P can at a given moment be posted by a student who belongs to the learning team, consisting of Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3, res- pectively Stud_v, be it Stud_1. According to Rule 2, Stud_1 cannot be on active team E2, and according to Rule 3 he cannot be on active team E3 of this problem. According to Rule 4, student Stud_1 can analyze any of the solutions offered for problem P. According to Rule 2, students Stud_2, Stud_3, Stud_v in the learning team can analyze problem P and then, accor- ding to Rule 5, they can offer any number of solutions S01, S02, S03, ... for this problem. According to Rule 4, students Stud_2, Stud_3, Stud_v cannot analyze any of the solutions S01, S02, S03, which they provided for problem P and which belong to them.

Table 2. Example of formation of active teams from the initial learning team according to the authors of the contributions of the previous stage.

The Uloge activation logic unit, of dealing with the Sds disputable situation, works based on the rules of Table 2 supervising the relationships of the participants in the learning session. 3. Learning support system - structure

Fig. 4 shows the principle diagram of the learning assistance system.

The SCIA assisted learning system is configured to serve several learning action custo- mization units Upai_1, Upai_2, Upai_3, Upai_v that correspond to each of the students in the learning team made up, for example, of the real students, Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3 to which add a virtual student each time, Stud_v.

The essential element of the SCIA assistance system is a learning process coordination unit, VirTran. Inside VirTran there is a database of BSD disputable situations that is created and updated for each configured and launched learning session. To this base of situations, BSD is connected each personalized learning action unit, such as Upai_1, Upai_2, Upai_3, respectively Upai_v. In order to approach and coordinate a learning session, a Ucts learning session configuration unit is implemented on VirTran.

Through this unit, Ucts, the main instructor M_tra introduces the learning team, the topic of the learning session, the support of the learning activity and the work instructions and the time work parameters for an Up&s planning and synchronization unit. By configuration, several personalized Upai_k equal units are activated with the number (k-1) of real students of the learning team, to which a k unit is added for the virtual student. The temporal work parameters are the durations of the work stages established by the main instructor, respec- tively Te1, Te2, Te3, Te4. According to the planning of the stages of the learning session, the intervention of the authority instructor with role arbitration-validation of problem analyses, respectively solution, through the intermediary of the Uauth authority unit. The intervention occurs on the updated content of the BSD disputable situations database.

The planning and synchronization unit, Up&s has the role of issuing the signals corres- ponding to each active stage of the learning session and ensuring the working conditions for this session. Synchronization occurs by referring to the Xclk clock signal.

The end of the learning session activates a scoring and interpretation unit, Usc&int. Scoring allows the association of a numerical value, currently named, and graded, for each intervention planned, allowed, and carried out by the learning team. This unit also analyzes the numerical components of the score and makes an interpretation translated into a set of rules by which a characterization of the activity of the learning session is obtained. This characterization is transmitted to the main instructor in order to guide the activities of the following sessions.

The SCIA system includes a Ucomm communication unit, that provides Internet connection through the electronic mail service, for each real student Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3 and the main instructor M_tra, with his avatars of virtual student Stud_v and authority instructor, A_tra.

During the operation of the system, the identity signals of the students in the learning group IStud_1, IStud_2, IStud_3, IStud_v are used to activate the personalized units of action in learning and access to the base of disputable situations BSD.

3.1.Operation cycle

Fig. 5 shows the set of relationships that exist between learning activities, learning sup- port activities and the learning session configuration activity. Assisted learning activities, represented by stages E1, E2, E3, respectively E4, are accessible to real students Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3 and virtual student Stud_v. They are grouped on the elaboration of problems, E1 and E2, for the durations Te1 and Te2, respectively, and then on the solving of problems, E3 and E4 on the durations Te3 and Te4, respectively. Upon completion of the two sets of work stages, the activity of the learning session is stopped and the authority instructor A_tra which is activated covering the support stages E2x, for the duration of Te2x, respectively E4x, for the duration of Te4x. Upon completion of the learning support stages, control is returned to the student team.

The sequence of stages is ensured by the planning and synchronization unit Up&s of the assisted learning system, and their duration is established in the duration Tcs of a configu- ration duration located before and outside the learning session. From the point of view of the global planning of the learning session, it is comprised between T0 and Tf.

Fig. 6 shows the basic functional cycle of the SCIA assistance system. The sequence of stages of the learning session are represented. The reporting is done at the initial time TO when the learning session begins with the duration Ts. The sequence of stages, coordinated by the unit of coordination of the learning process, VirTran, starts with stage E1, uploading- posting problems, with duration Te1. The completion of the E1 stage means the launch of the second stage E2, of the analysis of the posted problems, with the duration Te2. The succe- ssion of stages allows the opening of the E2x stage, for validating the analysis of the problems, with the duration of Te2x. The continuation of the sequence opens the stage E3, of uploading and posting the solutions for the posted problems, with the duration Te3, and later opens the stage E4, of analyzing the solutions of the posted problems, with the duration Te4. After passing an interval ( Te1 +Te2+Te2x+Te3+Te4) the state of the learning process coordi- nation unit becomes E4x, validating the analysis of posted problem solutions, which lasts Te4x at the end of which it is activated state E5, of summarizing-personal valorization, with the duration Te5. In this way, it is found that the duration of the entire learning session is defined by the relationship (1).

Ts = ( Te1 + Te2 + Te2x + Te3 + Te4 + Te4x + Te5) (1)

It should be noted that due to the construction of the VirTran learning process coordi- nation unit, its operation is ensured only if the temporal components of the amount Ts are known.

Fig. 7 details the temporary disposition of the interventions of the students involved in the learning process, within the stages.

The stages of the learning session are accessed in interventions by each individual participant in the learning process, according to their own intentions and needs. The number of interventions is independent of the assistance system, as is their duration.

With reference to stage E1 and the situation in Table 3 the sequences of interventions are grouped by the participants who perform them.

In Table 3 student Stud_1 uploads a problem P01 in an intervention E1.1, student Stud_2 uploads in an intervention E1.3 then a problem P03 and in another intervention E1.4 another problem P04, student Stud_3 does not upload any problem and does not intervention, just like the virtual student Stud_v. In an intervention E1.5 the student Stud_3 uploads a problem P04. The temporary disposition of the interventions is thus detailed. Thus, through the analysis of the representations, it is found that duration (E1.1) < duration (E1.2); duration (E1.1) < duration (E1.3), where E1.3 represents the third intervention that occurs in stage E1. It is also noted that student Stud_1 has only one intervention in the E1 stage. In each intervention of stage E1, the participant can upload the desired number of problems for pos- ting. Thus, student Stud_3 has two interventions E1.3 and E1.4 in which, for example, problems P03 and P04 are loaded.

Table 3. An example of a detailed description of the relationship between the interventions in stage El and their authors, the students of the learning team.

3.2 Command panels and general interaction

Fig. 8 shows the main control panel of the assisted learning system. The main control panel is where the active user with organizational duties is directed after logging in. The options that allow the human factor to interact with the modules of the assistance system are chained on this panel.

Through the M1 option, the active user manifests himself as a learning service provider and configures an order including payment. Making the payment activates the list of instruc- tors authorized to configure learning sessions using the service’s resources and informs the system about the number of sessions available to the team of instructors. Each session confi- guration action is completed by reducing the number of available sessions from the number of purchased sessions.

The M6 option is active if there are purchased sessions available. By using it, the lear- ning service provider can add new members to the list of authorized instructors.

Once the list of authorized instructors exists or is updated, any of these users is recog- nized by the service after authentication and has the possibility to use the M3 option to con- figure a learning session.

Through the configuration operation, the assistance system is informed for the students, regarding the topic of the learning session and the guidance support of the supposed activities, for the interactions of the assistance system regarding the list of people who have the status of participants in the learning session and the e-mail addresses of these people, for the evolution of the learning process coordination unit regarding the duration of the stages of the learning session.

The active user can also unconditionally use the M2 option through which he can access the guest instructor facility that allows the learning session to be set up in the same way as using the M3 option. The difference between the two situations is the way in which the ses- sion report is completed, respectively in the case of free work the name of the participants in the session activities is partially legible.

From the moment the learning session configuration is completed, the assistance system fully transfers control to the VirTran learning process coordination unit. Options M4 and M5 allow the active user access to the learning interface for arbitration and validation interven- tions of the team’s analysis, respectively access for interventions as a virtual student.

Options M4 and M5 can be accessed by default, during the session, directly from the learning interface, if the active user does not leave it between two successive interventions.

Fig. 9 shows the student’s control panel. Any student who is in the group in the confi- guration of a learning session is directed to this panel, at any time when they try to enter the assisted learning system, if they have left the learning interface and become active user after a new login. On the control panel there is a clock of the service and the list of sessions in progress in which the active user appears as a student.

Sessions in progress can be in a state of waiting (wait) or in a state of accepting user access with S1 (join). With the S1 option, the user is directed to the learning interface that he can leave with Logout or where he can stay until the end of the learning session.

3.3 Personalized interface unit

Fig. 10 shows the adaptation unit diagram of the Upa_i learning activity personalization module. The activity of the student, Stud_i, i=1, 2, 3, v, who became an active user of the assistance system following an authentication, is decided by the set of distinct positions, com- manded by a unit of control of the Uc2i learning interface that manages the access regimes to the disputable situations on the P3i, Kid image-panel to the inspection-knowledge resources of Kip contributions, to the operations bar BaO, Kio, respectively to the elementary actions bar of the activated operations, Kis.

During the work, the role of the instructor and his intervention rights are managed by a unit for adapting the Uap customization mode commanded by the content of the BSD base through the X3 signal set according to the XI signal generated by the Uai activity unit learning.

By means of the Kid switch, the active student can access the disputable situations on the P3i image-panel of the base, which includes for all students the totality of the existing contributions and for each individual student the values of the parameters that belong to him.

During the regime of access to the commands of the planned stages, Kio, the operation bar BaO is accessible. Selecting an operation causes the active student to enter the mode of accessing the elementary actions bar of the activated Kia command.

Access to the action bar also allows the active student access to a set of access contacts to contributions Kc1, Kc2, Kc3, respectively Kc4, and other access contacts to parameters Kp1, Kp2, Kp3, respectively Kp4.

By activating the contacts from each Stud_i student of the learning team, the files of the learning session contributions and the values of the parameters assigned by the student are directed from the RPS-stimulated own resource base of the latter to the Uml local memory unit of the assistance system.

The session contributions are non-editable pdf files, FP for the problem contribution, FRAP for the problem analysis report, FS for the problem solution contribution, FRAS the problem solution analysis report and the values the analysis parameters are Opp i for the op- portunity, Sevp_i for the problem incident severity, Usa_i the usability value of the problem solution respectively Sevs_i for the solution incident severity.

By validating the activities associated with the steps of the operation, the X4 infor- mation set made up of the contributions and parameters entered by the Stud_i student related to the ongoing intervention, is loaded into the BSD disputable situations database.

The planning and synchronization unit Up&s commands the intervention stages of the learning session E1, E2, E2x, E3, E4, E4x, as temporary access windows XI and as a way of chaining the elementary actions that make up the operations selected in these access windows of to the active user via the X2 signal.

3.4 Description of the learning process coordination unit interface

Fig. 11 shows the learning interface that allows the active user to access the resources of the assisted learning system. The interface consists of an operation area with an image-panel P3i of the system information base and an inspection button bar Bal, an operation button bar, BaO, and a bar of elementary operation actions, BaA. The operation bar, BaO includes in all situations the option to leave the system, Logout, and the BaO action bar includes the option to cancel the last activated operation, Cancel.

The P3i image-panel is organized into columns. Each column includes fields that correspond to the description of a posted disputable situation, Sds, supplemented by an arbi- trated disputable situation, Sda. Each posted situation, in the order of posting, has the name Dxy, where x and y represent. Vertically, each situation has a field Cl, which refers to the identification of the disputable situation introduced in the learning process, C2 a field that refers to the problem of the situation, a field C3, which refers to the opportunity value asso- ciated with the problem, a field C4, which refers to the criticality of the problem through a problem incident report, a field C5, which refers to the severity value associated with the pro- blem incident report, if it exists, a field, C6, which refers to a solution that can be associated with the problem of the disputed situation, a field, C7 associated with the usability value assigned to the solution of the problem of the disputed solution, a field, C8 associated with a problem solution incident report, a field, C9 associated with the severity value assigned to the problem incident report. The fields are the same, and in the same number, for any posted disputable situation, Dxy, but differ in their content.

The IPI interface of the learning process is customized for the current active user. Cus- tomization refers to the parameter values associated with each posted disputable situation that appear in the image-panel, P3i. The information in P3i which refers to the contributions of the learning session, i.e., problems, solutions and possible incident reports are common to all interfaces for all participants in the learning process.

Bal inspection button bar, allows to view the name of the existing files of the contri- butions of the selected disputable situation be it D01, D02, D03, ... respectively P00, for the problem, Pi00, for the type for the problem incident report, S00, for the solution of the posted problem, Si00, for posted problem solution incident type.

The example concerns the work stage that follows the launch of an intervention, be it E4 when the active user is informed about the disputable situations that appear through the gray buttons that he can access according to his previous actions, i.e., D02, respectively D05.

Fig. 12 shows the situation of the learning interface that corresponds to the selection action of the disputable situation D05. When selecting a disputable situation, its elements are highlighted. Also, on the Bal inspection bar are the names of contributions previously saved in the BSD base of the support system and which can be inspected as pdf files.

Fig. 13 shows the situation of the learning interface after the active user chooses a dis- putable situation and selects an activated intervention operation, for example, in stage E4, be it “Incident reporting”.

Fig. 14 presents the learning interface after activating a value selection action of the selected operation on BaA be it “Incident reporting” of active user intervention in a planned stage, E4.

Fig. 15 describes the working example of the learning interface when the active user has selected one of the situations accessible to him, be it DOS. The information for the other accessible situations is discarded and their access fields become white.

Fig. 16 describes the next work step of the learning interface, where the selection of the incident reporting operation (Incident reporting) determines the launch of the BaA elemental actions bar customized to the operation with the first execution step. After selecting the de- sired operation, on the P3i image-panel are highlighted the fields that the launched operation would modify. Under the elementary actions bar there are texts that provide brief indications on the role of the bar’s buttons.

33.The general work sequence of an intervention

Fig. 17 shows the general mode of interaction of the active user with the learning interface of the assistance system during a launched intervention. The interaction presupposes both the operation of the assistance system, often called a machine, and the initiatives of the active human user who has authenticated and been identified by the learning system.

Under these conditions, if it is found at step In1OO that the intervention of the active user is in the session plan, the assistance system customizes in step In110 the components of the learning interface, i.e., the P3i image-panel, the operation bar BaO and the elementary actions bar of the selected operation BaA related to the specific operation launched.

Any intervention starts if there are, as in step In120, disputable situations accessible to the active user. A situation is accessible to the extent that none of the specific exclusion con- ditions are violated. If there are accessible disputable situations the user can decide following step In130 and approach them one by one as in step In140.

Under normal conditions, after selecting the accessible situation, the user will activate with Ini 60 operation according to his own interest. Activating the operation causes at step Ini 70 the launch of elementary actions that the user is invited to approach as in Ini 90 until exhaustion. If the list of actions is terminated by the confirmation step In200, then the system proceeds to update the image-panel P3i and directs the user to the operation bar, BaO where the resumption of the operation or the approach of another operation with the elements of the same selected available situation is expected.

The user can at any time abandon the actions of the sequence of the activated operation and with step In220 it is reached in the operation bar BaO without any kind of action on the panel-image P3i with step In230.

From the operation bar, BaO we can make the exceptional waiver of the ongoing inter- vention, permanently available to the user through step In130, step In140, InISO, the system updates the learning support information base through step In240, and then exiting the system through step In250.

A new intervention is possible with a new user authentication, if it is about the duration of the current stage or in the future stage of the ongoing session.

Fig. 18 represents the entire sequence and mode of interaction during a learning session in a sequence of steps from 100 to 270. Such a learning session is configured by the main instructor between two moment stamps TO and Tf, respectively. The learning session involves a series of activities characterized by nature and duration. By nature, the series of activities involves the interaction of some of the participants in the learning session with the VirTran learning process coordination unit through its interface. Since each activity of the participants is conditioned by a launch moment and a certain duration, the name of the activity is shared with the time interval and bears the name of the stage of the learning session. Stages E1, E2, E2x, E3, E4, E4x and E5 are thus identified.

At step 100 the main instructor M_tra, authorized by the system signal Xc, ensures the configuration of the session in a duration controlled by step 110 until the action is terminated. From the participants of the learning session, a team accepted by the authorization signal Xe1 starts at step 120 stage E1. The duration of the stage is supervised by step 130 and if Te1 is not terminated, specific interventions of loading and posting of contestable situations take place.

The termination of the duration of the stage E1 determines at step 140 the interventions of the participants accepted by the authorization signal Xe2 which each time form the team of the stage E2. The duration Te2 of step E2 is monitored by step 150 until all possible interven- tions are completed.

The termination of the duration of the E2 stage determines at step 160 the opening of the E2x stage of arbitration of the existing problem analyzes through the activity of the autho- rity instructor, A_tra. The duration of this step is supervised by step 170 and if Te2x is not terminated, the authority trainer can continue its activity.

The termination of the duration of the E2x stage determines at step 180 the interven- tions of the participants accepted by the Xe3 authorization signal, which each time form the team of the E3 stage. Duration Te3 of stage E3 is supervised by step 190 until all possible interventions are completed.

The termination of the duration of the E3 stage determines at step 200 the interventions of the participants accepted by the Xe4 authorization signal that each time form the team of the E4 stage. Duration Te4 of step E4 is monitored by step 210 until all possible interventions are completed.

The termination of the duration of the E4 stage determines at step 220 the opening of the E4x stage of arbitration of the existing solution analyzes through the activity of the autho- rity instructor, A_tra. The duration of this stage is monitored at step 230 and if duration Te4x is not terminated, the authority instructor can continue his activity.

The termination of the duration of the E4x stage determines at step 240 the interven- tions of the participants accepted by the authorization signal Xe4, which each time form the team of step E4. Duration Te4 of step E4 is supervised by step 250 until all possible inter- ventions are completed.

Once the interactions of the students and the authority instructor with the assistance system are completed, at step 260 the individual scores of the submitted activity and its quali- tative interpretation are constructed.

At step 270, the system communicates to each individual participant the score and inter- pretation of the activity that completes the configured learning session. A new learning ses- sion is possible by a new configuration and triggering the configured session. 3.4 Automatic system configuration

Fig. 19 shows the SCIA assisted learning system in automatic system configuration. For this, it is considered that the VirTran learning process coordination unit includes the learning session in a loop made by communicating the results to the student team, Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3, respectively Stud_v and, separately, to the main instructor M_tra. The nu- merical results that are delivered by the internal learning control unit are also sent to a Uirs session results interpretation unit that converts them into verbal rules. In this way, the main instructor M_tra can modify the support and planning of the next session and thus can adapt the learning process to the specifics of the work team.

4 The method of assisting learning - interactions with students

The interactions of the learning session produce in such a way that any student assigned to the session can intervene at any time, according to his desire with interventions appropriate to the current stage through any number of operations for which he has the right to do it in relation to his relations with the author of the contributions of the disputable situation. All these relationships are presented on the P3i image-panel so that the active user can select the disputable situations to act on.

4.1 Intervention El for posting problems

Fig. 20 shows an intervention from stage E1 intended to build the base of disputable situations of the assisted learning system. The intervention includes the problem loading-pos- ting operation and the problem elimination operation of the same participant. Uploading a problem causes a disputable situation to be generated. The elimination of a problem does not determine the elimination of the previously generated disputable situation.

The construction of the base of BSD disputable situations is done by the autonomous and voluntary action of any of the interested participants of the learning group.

If at step E1.100 it is found that the intervention of the active user is carried out in step E1, it is possible to activate the operation as at step E1.110.

If the load-post operation E11 is activated as in E1.120, then the elementary action bar E11a from step E1.130 is launched.

If the selection of the situation is made as in step E1.140, it is possible to activate the operation E12 to eliminate the problem as in step E1.150 which, as in step E1.160, also produces the launch of the elementary action bar E12a.

After the execution of the elementary actions, the selected situation is released as in step E1.170. The user can continue the intervention with a new operation activation as in step E1.110. If the stage is other than E1, proceed to perform its specific operations as in step E1.180. The learning assistance system controls the duration of the stage and causes it to be abandoned at the end of the configured time.

The intervention also implies access to the option to leave the system as an autonomous alternative operation. Leaving the interface is done without any intervention on the image- panel.

4.2 Intervention E2 for the problem analysis

Fig. 21 shows the set of interventions that allow the analysis of the problems of a dispu- table posted arbitrated situation, Sda. These interventions, in an unspecified number, at the disposal of the active user, are allowed and occur in stage E2 or stage E4 of the learning session.

The analysis involves three categories of operations, optional for the user: an oppor- tunity / usability value assignment, a compliance incident reporting, respectively a severity value assignment for a problem/ solution severity incident reported by another participant.

The intervention always refers to a problem / solution that belongs to a disputable situation. On the other hand, the E2/E4 stage is divided into two sub-stages E2.1/E4.1 and E2.2/E4.2 respectively. As in step E2.100, the fact that the intervention occurs within the first duration of the stage is checked.

If the intervention is in the first part of the stage, E2.1/E4.1, it is required to select an arguable Sda work situation as in step E2.110.

Once the disputable situation has been selected, proceed to the optional activation of the intervention operations.

If it is activated, as in step E2.150, operation E21 for assigning a quantitative criterion, opportunity/usability the elementary action bar E21a is also launched.

If, as in step E2.170, operation E22 of reporting a non-conformity incident is activated, then the elementary action bar E22a is also launched.

In both situations, upon completion of the execution of the activated operation as in step E2.190, the selected situation is released.

In the same half-step E2.1, the user’s activity can continue by selecting a new situation and resuming the activation of an available operation.

If the current moment corresponds to sub-step E2.2, the user is invited to select a dispu- table situation Sda and then activate severity value assignment operation E23 at step E2.210 which also causes the launch of action bar E23a.

At the end of the cycle of elementary actions the selected disputable situation is released as in step E2.250 and it is possible to resume the analysis with another situation.

If the stage is other than E2, proceed to perform its specific operations as in step E2.260.

The learning assistance system controls the duration of the stage and causes it to be abandoned at the end of the configured time.

The intervention also implies access to the autonomous option of leaving the system as an autonomous alternative operation. Leaving the interface is done without any intervention on the image-panel.

4.3 The E3 intervention of posting problem solutions

Fig. 22 shows the working method of an intervention in stage E3 coordinated by the assistance system and in which it is possible to return whenever the working time allocated by configuration is terminated or to the option of the active user to leave the application of the assisted learning system.

If at step E3.100 it is found that the intervention of the active user is carried out in step E3, the selection of a disputable situation accessible to the user is required as at step E3.110.

If the selection exists, then the user can activate operation E31 of uploading-posting the solution to the situation problem as in step E3.140 or removing the solution as in step E3.160. Activating operation E31 means launching elementary action bar E31a as in step E3.150.

If the selection exists and the operation E32 of removing the solution of the selected situation is activated, as in step E3.160, the elementary action bar E32a is launched.

After the execution of the elementary actions, the selected situation is released as in step E3.180.

The user can continue the intervention with a new dispute selection as in step E3.110 and another activated command.

If the stage is other than E3, proceed to perform its specific operations as in step E3.180.

The intervention also implies access to the option to leave the system as an autonomous alternative operation. Leaving the interface does without any intervention on the image-panel.

4.4 Intervention Ex of arbitrary validation of compliance incident analysis

Fig. 23 shows the interactions of the intervention of arbitration - validation of the opinion of the participants of the learning group in an incident of problem non-conformity as in stage E2x, respectively of the problem solution as in stage E4x.

If the user intervenes in the targeted stage, Ex, as in step Ex.100 then it is required to select a disputable situation Sda which was not previously arbitrated as in Ex.110. The user then activates as in Ex.130 the arbitration-validation operation that launches the bar of spe- cific elementary actions Ex.

The completion of the set of elementary actions determines, as in Ex.150, the release of the selected situation. The selected and arbitrated situation cannot be replayed in the same session.

The user can continue the intervention with a new selection of disputable situation as in step Ex.110 and another activated command.

If the stage is other than Ex, proceed to perform its specific operations as in step E3.160.

4.5 Elementary operations

Fig. 24 shows the way of loading a problem / solution type contribution in the image- panel of the learning interface.

Once the loading-posting operation is activated as in steps Ea.100 and Ea.110, the basic actions of selecting the contribution file from the working directory Ea.l and confirming the sequence of actions Ea.2 are launched. After confirmation, the control is transferred to the system which, as with Ea.120, opens/updates the selected or next Sda.

As in step Ea.130 the system returns the user to the operating panel of the learning interface.

The Cancel option has autonomous action with which the user can intervene at any time to abandon the ongoing action bar.

Fig. 25 shows the principle of removing a selected contribution. To eliminate a problem / solution type contribution, select the situation that includes the contribution, then launch the elementary actions bar and, as in Eb.100 and then Eb.110, the actions to display the contri- bution and confirm the selection.

Control is transferred to the system which produces the neutralization of the contribu- tion selected on the image-panel as in step Eb.120 whereby the contribution will no longer be the object of an operation after which it returns to the operating area of the learning interface.

The Cancel option has an autonomous action with which the user can intervene at any time to abandon the ongoing action bar.

Afterwards the user is brought to the operating area where he can continue the interven- tion operations in progress.

Fig. 26 shows the operation of assigning a numerical value to an analysis index that may be of timeliness, usability, or severity.

Once the operation is activated, the elementary actions bar is launched as in step Eq.100 for selecting the numerical value with action Eq.1, followed as in action Eq.2 by confirming the first action.

Control is transferred to the system which updates the criterion value on the image- panel as in step Eq.120 and then, as in step Eq.130, takes the user to the operating area for a new operation.

The standalone Cancel operation activated between elementary actions abandons the action bar without effect and returns the user to the operating area.

The updated analysis index values on the image-panel are accessible only to the cur- rently active user. These values are averaged and become public at the end of processing pro- blems, respectively problem solutions.

Fig. 27 shows how to perform the operation of reporting a compliance incident, whether it is a problem or a solution to a problem.

Activating the operation of reporting an incident occurs after launching the action bar and step-by-step execution of elementary actions with the piloting of the active user. The exe- cution and piloting actions allow through Ed.1 to select the file with the incident description report, then Ed.2 to select the type of incident, Ed.3 to complete the proposed severity value and complete the sequence by accepting the completed actions with Ed.4.

If the sequence is completed, control is given to the system, which updates the new image and then returns to the operating panel.

The standalone Cancel action allows at any time to abandon the action bar and return the user to the operating panel of the learning interface.

Fig. 28 shows the processing flow of the arbitration-validation operation of a problem incident or problem solution incident analysis.

Launching the arbitration-validation operation causes the launch of the step bar in the sequence Ee.1, Ee.2, Ee.3, Ee.4, which controls the introduction of the sequence of validation information.

At step Ee.120, the situation appears in which the user as an authority instructor does not recognize the severity value. In this situation, the user is obliged to upload an addition to the incident report.

After confirming the elementary actions of the operation, control is transferred to the system that updates the image-panel, after which it remains in the operating panel of the lear- ning interface.

The standalone Cancel action allows at any time to abandon the step bar and return the user to the operating panel of the learning interface.

5 Learning assistance method - synthesis of a learning session

Fig. 29 shows synthesis of completed activities of a learning session. The summary Table 4 is organized for a group of three real students and the virtual student. Each participant passes, according to the mode of operation of the assistance system, through all the planned stages with the durations configured by the main instructor, i.e., E1, E2.1+E2.2, E3, E4.1+E4.2.

By going through a planned step, a participant can act to upload a contribution, i.e., a problem, a problem or solution incident report, a solution, or select the value of a synthetic criteria such as the opportunity, Opp, of usability, Usa, of severity for the problem incident, Sevp, respectively of severity for the solution incident, Sevs. In relation to the implemented logic of the assistance system, the summary table shows moments in which the participant’s action is the voluntary situation of lack of activity, denoted by n/a or the imposed situation of lack of right of action, denoted by n/r.

In Table 4 the reference to a problem is marked with P01, with Pij/Skl the reference to the solution kl to the problem ij, with Pij/ipk the reference to a problem incident with the number k from the list of predefined problem incidents, for the problem with the number ij, with Pij/isk referring to a solution incident number k from the list of predefined solution incidents for problem number ij.

A particularity of the table describing the integral situation related to the learning ses- sion is that each student associates his contributions and criteria values with a disputable situ- ation, Dmn. A disputable solution is generated when the user uploads and the system post a problem and every time the participant uploads a new solution after the first one for a problem attached to a situation. At the time when a new disputable situation is introduced, the know- ledge about at earlier stages they become strictly informative and are no longer considered in the process of scoring and interpretation of the results.

The logic of completing the summary table is in the order of the stages of the learning session and by respecting the conventional order of the team of participants. It must be consi- dered every time that any change in the table is produced by interventions that are dependent on the place of activation. This detail is not captured in the situation table and is of no importance at this level of use.

In the correct interpretation of the description of the situation of a session, it is neces- sary to introduce the description and the convention of recording incidents as in Table 4.

The indices refer, the first to the student’s serial number, and the second to the disputable situation to which it refers.

Table 4. Incidents description.

Fig. 30 details the activity of the S1 student in the E1 stage. It is found that he posts problems P01 and P3. Simultaneously with it, however, problems P03 and P04 are also posted in the assistance system. These problems are posted by other participants, namely S2 and Sv students. Each problem triggers the initiation of a dispute situation. All contributions are contained in the image-panel and are accessible to all participants.

Fig. 31 details the problem analysis activity by posting problem incident reports, regardless of who posts them, and the values of the analysis indicators associated with the problems of the S1 student are displayed. These values are posted and visible only to the no- minated participant, in this case the S1 student.

Fig. 32 shows the activity of the S1 student in the problem-solving stage. This activity is concurrent with any other problem-solving activity regardless of the participants making the posting. Any disputable situation admits a solution related to the existing problems. If a problem such as P02 receives a new solution such as S02, then together with the solved problem this constitutes a new situation, DOS.

For the new disputable situation, the displayed problem is accessible for inspection only and all fields regarding the problem are not accessible for completion.

In Fig. 33, participants in the learning process have the possibility of solution analysis by reporting a solution incident or by completing the usability values for the solution of the selected situation or by the severity value for the solution incident reported for the same selec- ted situation. And here the contributions are accessible to all participants but the criteria values are given only for the use of the considered participant, in this case the S1 student.

6 Learning support system - individual scoring and session interpretation

Individual scoring is done as in (2) depending on the contribution of each student to covering the components of the disputable situations through the activity, as a fixed value respectively through the assessments made through the configuration stage of the learning session and as a variable value through the individual values of opportunity, usability and severity criteria for problem incidents, respectively problem solution.

The rating score of a disputable situation is (2), where: i is the order number of the disputable situation analyzed,

Fp_i, Vp_i are the fixed component of the score for submitting the problem of the si- tuation i, respectively the variable component of the score for analyzing the problem of the situation i,

Fip i, Vip_i are the fixed component of the score for submitting an incident report of the problem situation i, respectively the variable component of the score for analyzing the reported incident of the situation problem i,

Fs i, Vs _i are the fixed component of the score for submitting the solution to the pro- blem of situation i, respectively the variable component of the score for the solution of the problem of situation i,

Fis_i, Vis _i are the fixed component of the score for submitting an incident report of the solution to the problem of situation i, respectively the variable component of the score for the analysis of the reported incident of the solution to the problem of situation i. -wp, wip, ws, wis are weights with which the partial scores related to the contributions of the students’ activity intervene in the score sd_i attributed to the disputable situation i.

In turn, the variable components are functions expressed by values collected by the learning process coordination unit VirTran as in (3)... (6). shere

- Mopp_i is the average value of the opportunity of the problem of the situation collected by the unit of coordination of the learning process VirTran from the active students of the problem team;

- Musa _i is the average value of the usability of the solution to the problem of the situation collected and the unit of coordination of the learning process VirTran from the active students of the problem team;

- Msep_i. is the average value of the incident severity of the situation problem collected by the learning process coordination unit VirTran from the active students of the problem team;

- Mses _i is the average value of the severity of the incident of the solution of the pro- blem of the situation collected by the unit of coordination of the learning process VirTran from the active students of the problem team;

Finally, the score sc_j corresponding to the student j results by summing the partial scores related to each situation is as in (7) where nd represents the number of contested situations generated for the completed learning session.

Fig. 34 on represents the plan of disputable situations generated during a learning ses- sion, be they Dk, k=1...nd and each situation is made up of a complete or incomplete problem - solution set. In this way, we can talk about np problems and solutions. Each pair Dk={Pk, Sj} can be represented as a point in the plan of disputable situations, and the coordinates of the situations are the values of opportunity, oppjc, respectively, usability usa_j associated through the assessment activity of the N students of the learning team.

In the situation plan, the middle situation of the learning session is defined, Dm(Do, Du).

Fig. 35 gives a sequence that describes how to complete a learning session by inter- preting the voting results of activity participants. For this, it is assumed that it would be a learning session attended by a team of N=5 students, that the activity generates a set of D01, D02, D03, D04, DOS, respectively D06 disputable situations, each consisting of a pair of pro- blem i - solution, j contributions, Dxy (Pi, Sj).

Before constructing the session results interpretation report, at step Rin100 the session report is constructed by means of some quantitative indicators that consider the fact that the problems were posted by Nap=3 students, that there are Nas=4 students as authors of solutions, that there are a Ns total number of solutions. It is also considered that following the stages of the session, for each problem of a situation, an average value of opportunity and for each solution an average value of usability could be determined, so that D01(0.54; 0.74), D02(0.33; 0.64), D03(0.84; 0.84), D04(0.24; 0.00), D05(0.74; 0.54), D06(0.64; 0.84).

The quantitative indicators of the learning session are determined based on the relation- ships: a. Apparent degree of participation, Nap / N = 3/5 (Nap/N < 1, low participation; 1<Nap/N<2, participation on the limit; 2<Na/N, normal participation, where Nap is the number of problem authors in the learning session, N is the number of students of the learning team); b. Degree of active participation, Nas / N = 4/5 (Nas/N<l, insufficient active participation; Nas/N =1 normal active participation, where Nas is the number of distinguished authors of solutions, N is the number of students of the learning team). c. Apparent degree of activity, Nas / Nap = 4/6 (Nas /Nap < 1, apparent degree of insuf- ficient activity; Nas/Nap > 1, apparently satisfactory degree of activity, where Nas is the number of solution authors in the learning group; Nap is the number of problem authors posted in the learning session). d. Raw degree of approach to learning dispute Nd/N = 6/6 (Nd/N < 1, insufficient approach; Nd/N = 1, approach to the limit; Nd/N<2 sufficient approach; Nd/N> 2 active approach, where Nd is the number of disputable situations, N is the number of students of the learning team).

The session results interpretation report.

In the plan of situations, the middle situation of the learning session, Dm(Do, Du) is defined at step Rin120 where

Example: Do = (0.54 + 0.33 + 0.84 + 0.24 + 0.74 + 0.64) / 6 = 0.555; Du = (0.74 + 0.64 + 0.84 + 0.54 + 0.00 + 0.84) / 5 = 0.72.

At step Rin140, the plan of disputable situations of the session is divided into charac- teristic regions defined by the relations:

At step Rin160 the set of situations resulting from the learning session are classified according to the relations with the boundaries of the specific regions in the set of sets M11, M12, M21, respectively M22.

Successively, at step Rin180, then steps Rin200, Rin220 and Rin240, the verbal des- criptions for the four aspects of the interpretation report are compiled, exemplified in the given case:

Example:

Aspect 1: M11={D02, D04}, K11=2/6.

For all participants displays the situations from K11

Diagnosis: the problems in M11 are not timely or poorly conditioned and have inconsistent solutions.

Effect: Learning session without results.

Recommendation for the students: a) Identify problems and formulate them correctly. Choose the problems to solve carefully, b) Request the intervention of the instructor, c) Requests the modification of the topic of the session.

Recommendation for the instructor: Reconstruct the topic and adapt the learning session for these types of situations.

Aspect 2: For all participants displays the situations from M12={D01}, K12=1/6.

Diagnosis: weakly conditioned problems with apparently consistent solutions.

Effect: Inconclusive learning session for learning.

Recommendation for the students: Construct problems more systematically and completely.

Recommendation for the instructor: a) Reconstruct the theme, b) Adapt the next learning session to the deficiencies, c) Changes the composition of the learning team.

Aspect 3 :

For all participants displays the situations from M21={D05}, K21=1/6.

Diagnosis: well-conditioned problems with inconsistent solutions.

Effect: Announces the poor state of the learning session.

Recommendation for the students: a) Construct the problems more systematically and completely, b) Request the intervention of the instructor.

Recommendations for the instructor: a) Reconstruct the theme, b) Adapt the next learning session, c) Changes the composition of the learning team.

Aspect 4:

For all participants displays the situations from M22={D03, D06}, K22=2.

Diagnosis: well-conditioned problems with consistent solutions.

Effects: Learning session in optimal conditions.

Recommendation for the students: Keep learning conditions.

For the instructor: Adapt the following learning session.

Bibliography

[1] ALEXANDER, J., KELLEY, E.E. Method and system for collaborative learning. US patent 8,019,718. Posting date: 12^th of March 2008.

[2] MEIMER, E.K., BECKER, T.A. Multiuser learning system. US patent 8,082,505. Posting date: 2^nd of February 2007.

[3] COLLINS, D.L., BLOCKER, A.S. Method and apparatus for automated learning and performance evaluation. US patent 5,577,919. Posting date: 25^th of July 1995.

[4] DESENSI, Jr., F.J., DESENSI, III, F., HAGAN, J.R. System and method of education administration. US patent 8,187,004, Posting date: 3^rd of September 2004.

[5] WEIMER, M. Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. John Wiley&Sons. 2002.

[6] ISOC, D., ISOC, T., A new adaptive teaching method for engineering school, Journal Plus Education, 6(2), 2010, pp. 124-131.

[7] YONEZU, Y., OSAKI, M., ITO, S. Education system suitable for group learning. US patent 6,915,104. Posting date: 14^th of March 2002.

[8] BATARSEH, I., GARIBAY, O. Computer system providing collaborative learning features and related methods. US patent 9,971,753. Posting date: 6^th of June 2006.

[9] MATTOS LIMA, A.B., CARDONHA, C.H., GUIMARAES, R.L., SANTANA, V.F.D. Learning systems and automatic transitioning between learning systems. US patent 10,573,194. Posting date: 31^st of March 2017.

[10] GILLIAM, T.K., R.A. HARRIMAN, Computer-based group problem solving method and system, Patent SUA 5,878,214, Posting date: 10^th of July 1997.

[11] VAUGHAN, Jr.,W. , Learning method, US patent 6,419,496 Bl, Patent date: 16^th of July 2002.

[12] KISHI, K., TSURUTA,S., OSHIMA, T., EGUCHI, T., Problem solving method and system, US patent 5,940,817, Patent date: 17^th of August 1999.

[13] HO, C.F., TONG, P.P., Computer-aided group-leaming methods and systems, US patent 6,029,043, Patent date: 22^nd of February 2000.

[14] HO, C.F., TONG, P.P., Computer-aided learning system and method, US patent 6,139,330, 31^st of October 2000.

[15] HO, C.F., TONG, P.P., Computer-aided group-leaming methods and systems, US patent 6,160,987, Patent date: 12^th of December 2000.

[16] CHAO, D., CHANG, H.T., TONG, P.P., Computer-aided learning method and systems matching students with instructors, US patent 6,325,632, Patent date: 4^th of December 2001.

[17] REMSCHEL, R., Computer assisted learning system, US patent 6,411,796, Patent date: 25^th of June 2002.

[18] WAUGHAN, Jr., W., Learning method, US patent 6,419,496, Patent date: 16^th of July

2002.

[19] HO, C.F., DEL FAVERO, Jr.J.P, TONG,P.P., Inexpensive computer-aided learning methods and apparatus for learners, US patent 6,685,478, Patent date: 3^rd of February 2004.

[20] HO, C.F., TONG, P.P., Computer-aided learning system and method, US patent 6,688,888, Patent date: 10^th of February 2004.

Claims

1. Computer-assisted learning system and method intended to automate the process of assimilation of knowledge and skills characterized by the fact that it works connected to an Internet network where each participant can act autonomously, in compliance with a program of functional units with the durations set by the coordinator activity through a configuration unit (Ucts) and that it consists of a learning process coordination unit (VirTran) that looks at a number of personalized learning units, equal to the number of real students (Upa_1, Upa_2, Upa_3) also established by configuration by the main instructor (M_tra) and a virtual student (Upa_v) and which has inside a base of dispu- table situations (BSD) which at the end of the duration of the learning session is used by a scoring and interpretation unit (Usc&int) for the quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the activity submitted by each participant and its centralized communication through a unit of communication (Ucomm) in the form of a personalized individual report so that it covers the situation of the entire group but only the name of the recipient is clear.

2. Assisted learning system of claim 1 characterized by the fact that the teacher’s role is broken down into three functions implemented separately: the virtual student function (Stud_v), with restricted rights to formulating problems, carrying out analyzes and solving problems and without authority attributes, the position of main instructor (M_tra) with restricted rights to establish the topic and planning of the learning session and the position of authority instructor (A_tra) with rights restricted exclusively to refereeing and validating the analysis performed by the students of the learning group through reports of incident.

3. Assisted learning system of claim 1 characterized by the fact that in its composition a personalized interface unit (Uipi) configured according to the identity of the active user and according to his previous activity high interventions of the launched learning session, as well as according to the stage and the intervention in progress and made up of a block driving interface (U2i) that interacts with an image-panel (P3i), with a posted contri- butions inspection bar (Bal), an access bar to interface operations (BaO) and the elemen- tary actions bar (BaA) detailed of each operation, activated in a unitary sequence, active bar that controls the active user who can load through some actuated contacts (Kc1, Kc2, Kc3, Kc4) some desired contributions, posted for all participants or can update, through other contacts (Kp1, Kp2, Kp3, Kp4), parameter values necessary for the learning acti- vity from the active user posted only for the current user until the average values calcu- lated by the assistance system are determined.

4. Assisted learning system of the claims 1 and 2 characterized by the same elementary temporal unit is the learning session which is processed on the basis of a theme initially imposed a set of standard disputable situations (Sds) made up each in a unitary way and generically called contributions, with a well-specified duration, around a problem written by a student (stage E1), followed by an analysis of the problem (stage E2), then a solution by a student other than the author of the problem (stage E3) and an analysis of the solution (stage E4), that all contributions are written and posted, on the learning interface (Uipi) of the assistance system, for consultation available to all participants, that the entire process of evaluation of contributions it is done by collecting and processing from all participants, by averaging two numerical indexes, problem opportunity to assess the interest in a pro- blem, respectively solution usability to assess the quality of the solution.

5. Assisted learning system of the claims 1, 2, and 4 characterized by the same elementary temporal unit, it can be completed by adding two additional stages intended for the inter- vention of an authority instructor (A_tra) who through the facilities of the learning inter- face (Uipi) makes the arbitration, respectively the validation of the problem analysis (E2x), respectively the problem solution analysis (E4x) through which the standard disputable situation (Sds) becomes an arbitrated disputable situation (Sda).

6. Assisted learning system of the claims 1, 2 and 4 characterized by the fact that, fol- lowing the completion of the learning session, the results are sent electronically to the participants (Stud_1, Stud_2, Stud_3, respectively Stud_v) and, separately, to the main instructor (M_tra) both in numerical form and form of interpretation in the form of rules that allow the modification of the support and the planning of the next session so that it can adapt the learning process to the specifics of the work team.

7. Assisted learning system of the claims 1, 2, and 4 characterized by the fact that it has a main control panel of the assisted learning system that centralizes the basic roles of authenticated users as well as for activation the temporary roles acquired by configuring and activating some stages of the learning sessions in progress, so that at the end of the stage, the terminated role is filed in the role archive.

8. Assisted learning method characterized by the fact that the core of the learning activity is the set of predefined interactions that students ensure by exploiting the learning inter- face (Uipi) during certain work stages predetermined by configuration and through sets of operations broken down into elementary actions followed, in browsing mode and com- pleted by posting the effects on the image-panel of the information (P3i) in the form of files with non-modifiable content in pdf format or in the form of numerical values of evaluation parameters, on the learning session.

9. Assisted learning method of claim 8 characterized by the fact that the direct interaction of the human instructor (M_tra) with the learning group includes exclusively the activity of configuring the learning session through which the assistance system is specified the information regarding to the topic of work, the support of the session, the learning compo- sition and the way of planning the session and in specific interventions, as a virtual student, in which the activity is limited only to attributions identical to those of real students, i.e. posting of problems, posting of troubleshooting and reporting incidents of non-compliance.

10. Assisted learning method of claim 8 characterized by the fact that for the stage of deve- loping and posting problems (E1), each student in the learning team prepares the desired number of problems identified by him in the information support provided by the instructor of the activity to the learning process, upload each problem under control that the system posts to the service image-panel (P3i) after changing the name for anony- mization.

11. Assisted learning method of claim 8 characterized by the fact that for the analysis stage of the posted problems (E2) each student in the learning team has the possibility to access the anonymized texts of the problems and then assign an opportunity value for selected problems, value that is also displayed on the image-panel (P3i) of the learning interface.

12. Assisted learning method of claim 8 characterized by the fact that for the stage of analyzing the solutions of the posted problems (E2), each student in the learning team has the possibility to access the anonymized texts of the solutions and problems and then assign a usability value for selected solutions, value that is also displayed on the image- panel (P3i) of the learning interface.

13. Assisted learning method of claim 8 characterized by the fact that all active participants in the learning process act through interventions with pre-determined action, uniformly, without any sign of assumed identity.