[LON-CAPA-cvs] cvs: modules /gerd/roleclicker description.tex

www lon-capa-cvs@mail.lon-capa.org
Tue, 17 May 2005 17:47:44 -0000

www		Tue May 17 13:47:44 2005 EDT

  Modified files:              
    /modules/gerd/roleclicker	description.tex 
Index: modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex
diff -u modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex:1.39 modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex:1.40
--- modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex:1.39	Tue May 17 13:23:20 2005
+++ modules/gerd/roleclicker/description.tex	Tue May 17 13:47:39 2005
@@ -180,7 +180,7 @@
 \subsubsection{\label{subsec:disccat}Discussion Classification}
-Student discussion entries are classified into three types and four features. The four types are
+Student discussion entries are classified into four types and with ten possible features. The four types~\cite{discpaper} are
 \item[Emotional] - discussion contributions were classified as ``emotional" if they mostly communicated opinions,
 complaints, gratitude, feelings, etc. Two subtypes were ``positive" and ``negative."
@@ -191,7 +191,7 @@
 \item[Conceptual] - contributions that deal with the underlying concepts of the problem. Two subtypes were
 ``question" and ``answer."
-In addition, discussion contributions were classified by the following features:
+In addition, discussion contributions were classified by the following features~\cite{discpaper}:
 \item[Unrelated] - the contribution is not related to the problem.
 \item[Solution-oriented] - the goal of the contribution is to arrive at the correct answer without mentioning or
@@ -199,70 +199,35 @@
 \item[Mathematical] - the contribution deals mostly with the mathematical aspects of the problem.
 \item[Physics] - the contribution deals mostly with the physics aspects of the problem.
-Table~\ref{table:examples} shows examples of contributions from the study on online discussions~\cite{discpaper} and their classification.
+In addition, the following features are considered, which were used in  
+an earlier study of discussions around group exercises in an introductory Computer Science course at Michigan State University (derived from Johnson et al.~\cite{johnson}):
+Contributes Idea; Encourages Participation; Summarizes/Integrates; Check for Understanding; Relates New to Old Learning; Gives Direction to Work.
+Table~\ref{table:examples} shows an example of a discussion classification according to this scheme.
-\caption{Examples of discussion contribution types and features~\cite{discpaper}.\label{table:examples}} 
-Why is it that homeworks are getting longer and longer?
-Everyone keeps saying they figured it out, but no one is telling how. Please let us know because we have tried everything!
-Bless your heart, and thank you for having the patience to explain this vector addition stuff to people like me who're really struggling with this vector and sin, cos stuff. It's
-starting to all come together.
-Sometimes, when I think of the word ``physics,'' I get a sickening feeling in the pit of my stomach. It's sort of like a burning sensation.
-If this is extra credit, does that mean it won't be on the exam?
-Post the answers you know are correct for sure ... all do this .. and we'll get it.
-What's an arctan?
-``e'' for this equation is equal to one because it is a black body ... hope this helps.\\\hline
-Use this formula: T(final) = (m1c1T1+m2c2T2) / (m1c1+m2c2). Convert temp to Kelvin and then for your final answer convert back to Cel.&
-Thanks, I just realized it. I was supposed to solve for cos(c) by moving everything to the other side of the equation then take the cos$\hat{ }$-1 of that.&
-Use equation for torque:\newline
-torque = current * area * sin(90)\newline
-It is 90 because it is a rectangle.\newline
-Once you solve for torque multiply it by the N they give you and that is your answer. Make sure to convert your mA to A and cm to m before putting into equation.
-I thought you could use the equations for rolling without slipping ... can anyone clarify as to why not?
-Do not add 90 degrees. Your answer depends on which quadrant your angle is in. You want the answer to be in the upper right quadrant, so add 180 to the absolute value of your answer if you have a negative x component value to find the angle you are looking for.
-I have the correct answer, but I don't understand why it is correct. Why would there be an acceleration at the ball's highest point? Why wouldn't it be zero?
+\caption{Example of a discussion classification around the collision problem Fig.~\ref{reprecoll}.\label{table:examples}} 
+A&It's "inelastic," so they'll just sit there after the crash.&Conceptual; Physics.\\\hline
+B&What do you mean, "sit there?"&Surface; Question.\\\hline
+A&Like, they're not gonna move.&Surface; Answer.\\\hline
+C&Nah, they're just gonna stick together \ldots like with the Velcro.&Surface; Physics; Relates New to Old Learning.\\\hline
+A&Same thing.&Surface.\\\hline
+C&But they can stick together {\it and} move \ldots you know, like on the airtrack with the Velcro, and they still move in the end.&Conceptual; Physics; Relates New to Old Learning\\\hline
+B&What are they even asking?&Surface; Question; Solution-oriented.\\\hline
+A&How much damage --- he said how much energy gets lost.&Surface; Answer; Solution-oriented.\\\hline
+C&Energy is conserved.&Surface; Physics.\\\hline
+A&Like, how much goes into heat and deformation, you know.&Conceptual; Physics.\\\hline
+C&Okay, so we need energy before and after the crash.&Conceptual; Physics.\\\hline
+A&And they're gonna move after the crash?&Conceptual; Question; Physics.\\\hline
+C&Maybe.&Conceptual; Answer; Physics.\\\hline
+A&How would you know? Is momentum conserved here in inelastic?&Conceptual; Question; Physics.\\\hline
+B&This problem sucks. How like comes up with this [\ldots] anyway?&Emotional; Negative.\\\hline
+C&Let's just calculate it. So, $E=\frac12mv^2$, and it's like two cars before and one pile of junk afterwards.&Procedural; Solution-oriented; Gives direction to work.\\\hline
+B&What about the wall?&Surface; Question.\\\hline
-In an earlier study of group exercise in an introductory Computer Science course at Michigan State University, we successfully used the following additional features derived from Johnson et al.~\cite{johnson}:
-\item[Contributes Idea] - e.g., ``Maybe we ought to think about ...''
-\item[Encourages Participation] - e.g., ``You haven't said much. What do you think?''
-\item[Summarizes/Integrates] - e.g.,``Well, a moment ago, Sue said ... so I think this ties into ... which Beth just said.''
-\item[Check for Understanding] - e.g., ``I'm not sure I followed that. Are you saying that ...?''
-\item[Relates New to Old Learning] - e.g., ``Well, we had decided earlier that ... but Bob found ... what happens if we combine that?''
-\item[Gives Direction to Work] - e.g.,`` How about if we look at things {\it this} way?''
-Also, the following 
-superclasses are considered:
-\item[Chat] - all contributions that are unrelated or emotional.
-\item[Emotional climate] - the number of positive non-unrelated contributions minus the number of negative non-unrelated
-contributions. This number would be negative if the problem led to mostly negative emotional comments.
-\item[Type and feature sums] - number of all related contributions belonging to a certain type, subtype, or feature.
 \subsubsection{Previous Results of Discussion Analysis}\label{prevdiscrev}
 An analysis of asynchronous online discussions has previously been carried out by the PIs, and we expect some of the results to transfer to in-class discussion settings.