Effective Active Course Learning Method for Education Data Using Feature Base Classification Model
|International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT)||
|© 2019 by IJETT Journal|
|Year of Publication : 2019|
|Authors : Mrs.R.Nirmala Devi, Ms.Anupriya Sharma
|DOI : 10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V67I10P229|
MLA Style: Mrs.R.Nirmala Devi, Ms.Anupriya Sharma "Effective Active Course Learning Method for Education Data Using Feature Base Classification Model" International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology 67.10 (2019):182-186.
APA Style:Mrs.R.Nirmala Devi, Ms.Anupriya Sharma, Effective Active Course Learning Method for Education Data Using Feature Base Classification Model International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology, 67(10),182-186
Educational researchers commonly use a variety of methods such as classroom observation, content analysis, surveys and interviews to collect data and analyze teachers’ reflective thinking. This paper describes the different methods and reveals in depth meanings within the unstructured data, but is time-consuming and cannot be implemented in a large scale. The objectives from these paper studies may be subject to the subjective impression of educational researchers. Moreover, the results obtained from these methods are lagging behind and cannot help teacher trainers make timely intervention policies. On the other hand, the data-driven approaches such as educational data mining and learning analytics are able to analyze mass of relative data and visualize results. The proposed approaches, however, are mainly used for the analysis of structured data, including learning behavior data, performance data and administrative data recorded in effective course review management systems (ECMS) or online learning environments (OLE) such as Moodle. In this proposed system analysis the inductive content analysis and a common classification method for analyzing review content.
 X. Chen, M. Vorvoreanu, and K. Madhavan, “Mining social media data for understanding students? learning experiences,” IEEE Trans. Learning Technol., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 246–259, Jul.-Sep. 2014.
 M. Rost, L. Barkhuus, H. Cramer, and B. Brown, “Representation and communication: Challenges in interpreting large social media datasets,” in Proc. Conf. Comput. Supported Cooperative Work, 2013, pp. 357–362.
 S. Cherrington and J. Loveridge, “Using video to promote early childhood teachers? thinking and reflection,” Teaching Teacher Educ., vol. 41, pp. 42–51, 2014.
 L. Rourke and T. Anderson, “Validity in quantitative content ana-lysis,” Educ. Technol. Res. Development, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 5–18, 2004.
 W. L. Chen, and C. K. Looi, “Incorporating online discussion in face to face classroom learning: A new blended learning approach,” Australasian J. Educ. Technol., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 308– 327, 2007
 L. van den Bergh, A. Ros, and D. Beijaard, “Teacher learning in the concourse review of a continuing professional development program: A case study,” Teaching Teacher Educ., vol. 47, pp. 142–150, 2015.
 C. Tsai, “Understanding social nature of an online community of practice for learning to teach,” Educ. Technol. Soc., vol. 15, no. 2,271–285, 2012.
 Dawson, D. Gasevic, G. Siemens, and S. Joksimovic, “Current state and future trends: A citation network analysis of the learning analytics field,” in Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Learning Analytics Knowl., Mar. 2014, pp. 231–240.
 M. Liu, R. A. Calvo, A. Pardo, and A. Martin, “Measuring and visualizing students? behavioral engagement in writing activities,” IEEE Trans. Learning Technol., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 215–224, Apr.-Jun. 2015
 M. Van Manen, “Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical,” Curriculum Inquiry, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 205–228, 1977.
Active Education Data Mining, Teacher Reflection Data, TF-IDF Classification, Machine Learning.