• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

最小熵协作分组:一种用于自动异构学习分组形成的工具。

Minimum entropy collaborative groupings: A tool for an automatic heterogeneous learning group formation.

机构信息

Centre d'Estudis Superiors de l'Aviació (CESDA), Reus, Catalonia, Spain.

ARGET Research Group, Faculty of Education Sciences and Psychology, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, Catalonia, Spain.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2023 Mar 15;18(3):e0280604. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280604. eCollection 2023.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0280604
PMID:36920915
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10016679/
Abstract

For some decades now, theories on learning methodologies have advocated collaborative learning due to its good results in terms of effectiveness and learning types and its promotion of educational and social values. This means that teachers need to be able to apply different criteria when forming heterogeneous groups of students and to use automated techniques to assist them. In this study, we have created an approach based on complex network theory to design an algorithm called Minimum Entropy Collaborative Groupings (MECG) in order to form these heterogeneous groups more effectively. The algorithm was tested firstly under a synthetic framework and secondly in a real situation. In the first case, we generated 30 synthetic classrooms of different sizes and compared our approach with a genetic algorithm and a random grouping. In the latter case, the approach was tested on a group of 200 students on two subjects of a master's degree in teacher training. For each subject there were 4 large groups of 50 students each, in which collaborative groups of 4 students were created. Two of these large groups were used as random groups, another group used the CHAEA test and the fourth group used the LML test. The results showed that the groups created with MECG were more effective, had less uncertainty and were more interrelated and mature. It was observed that the randomized groups did not obtain significantly better LML results and that this cannot be related to any emotional or motivational effect because the students performed the test as a placebo measure. In terms of learning styles, the results were significantly better with LML than with CHAEA, whereas no significant difference was observed in the randomized groups.

摘要

几十年来,学习方法理论一直提倡协作学习,因为它在效果和学习类型方面有很好的效果,并且促进了教育和社会价值。这意味着教师需要能够在形成异质学生群体时应用不同的标准,并使用自动化技术来辅助他们。在这项研究中,我们基于复杂网络理论创建了一种方法,设计了一种称为最小熵协作分组(MECG)的算法,以便更有效地形成这些异质群体。该算法首先在合成框架下进行测试,然后在实际情况下进行测试。在第一种情况下,我们生成了 30 个不同大小的合成教室,并将我们的方法与遗传算法和随机分组进行了比较。在第二种情况下,该方法在一个 200 名学生的硕士研究生培训课程的两个科目中进行了测试。对于每个科目,有 4 个 50 名学生的大组,在其中创建了 4 名学生的协作组。其中两个大组作为随机组,另一个组使用 CHAEA 测试,第四个组使用 LML 测试。结果表明,使用 MECG 创建的小组更有效,不确定性更小,相互关联更紧密,更成熟。观察到随机分组并没有获得明显更好的 LML 结果,并且这不能与任何情感或动机效果相关联,因为学生将测试作为安慰剂措施进行。在学习风格方面,LML 的结果明显优于 CHAEA,而随机分组则没有明显差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9970/10016679/730684fcdf6c/pone.0280604.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9970/10016679/b0c5825e5b72/pone.0280604.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9970/10016679/ee2025f85950/pone.0280604.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9970/10016679/730684fcdf6c/pone.0280604.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9970/10016679/b0c5825e5b72/pone.0280604.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9970/10016679/ee2025f85950/pone.0280604.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9970/10016679/730684fcdf6c/pone.0280604.g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Minimum entropy collaborative groupings: A tool for an automatic heterogeneous learning group formation.最小熵协作分组:一种用于自动异构学习分组形成的工具。
PLoS One. 2023 Mar 15;18(3):e0280604. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280604. eCollection 2023.
2
The effectiveness of internet-based e-learning on clinician behavior and patient outcomes: a systematic review protocol.基于互联网的电子学习对临床医生行为和患者结局的有效性:一项系统评价方案。
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):52-64. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1919.
3
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
4
Impact of summer programmes on the outcomes of disadvantaged or 'at risk' young people: A systematic review.暑期项目对处境不利或“有风险”的年轻人的影响:一项系统综述。
Campbell Syst Rev. 2024 Jun 13;20(2):e1406. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1406. eCollection 2024 Jun.
5
How the study of online collaborative learning can guide teachers and predict students' performance in a medical course.在线协作学习研究如何指导教师并预测医学课程中学生的表现。
BMC Med Educ. 2018 Feb 6;18(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s12909-018-1126-1.
6
How social network analysis can be used to monitor online collaborative learning and guide an informed intervention.如何利用社会网络分析来监测在线协作学习并指导实施有针对性的干预措施。
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 22;13(3):e0194777. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194777. eCollection 2018.
7
Perceived positive social interdependence in online versus face-to-face team-based learning styles of collaborative learning: a randomized, controlled, mixed-methods study.在线与面对面团队合作学习模式下的协作学习中感知到的积极的社会相互依存关系:一项随机对照混合方法研究。
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Jul 23;22(1):567. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03633-y.
8
Collaborative learning in small groups in an online course - a case study.在线课程中小小组协作学习:一个案例研究。
BMC Med Educ. 2022 Mar 10;22(1):165. doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03232-x.
9
Effect of task-based group experience on collaborative learning: Exploring the transaction activities.基于任务的小组经验对协作学习的影响:探究交易活动。
Br J Educ Psychol. 2023 Dec;93(4):879-902. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12603. Epub 2023 May 1.
10
Group concept mapping: An approach to explore group knowledge organization and collaborative learning in senior medical students.群体概念图:一种探索高年级医学生群体知识组织和协作学习的方法。
Med Teach. 2017 Oct;39(10):1051-1056. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2017.1342030. Epub 2017 Jul 6.

本文引用的文献

1
Evidence-Based Higher Education - Is the Learning Styles 'Myth' Important?基于证据的高等教育——学习风格“神话”重要吗?
Front Psychol. 2017 Mar 27;8:444. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00444. eCollection 2017.
2
Learning Styles: Concepts and Evidence.学习风格:概念与证据。
Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2008 Dec;9(3):105-19. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6053.2009.01038.x. Epub 2008 Dec 1.
3
Learning styles: where's the evidence?学习风格:证据何在?
Med Educ. 2012 Jul;46(7):634-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04273.x.
4
Missing and spurious interactions and the reconstruction of complex networks.缺失和虚假交互以及复杂网络的重构。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Dec 29;106(52):22073-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0908366106. Epub 2009 Dec 14.
5
The role of the airline transportation network in the prediction and predictability of global epidemics.航空运输网络在全球流行病预测及可预测性中的作用。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Feb 14;103(7):2015-20. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510525103. Epub 2006 Feb 3.