"Consciousness". Selected Bibliography 1970 - 2001

This is a bibliography of books and articles on consciousness in philosophy, cognitive science, and neuroscience over the last 30 years. There are three main sections, devoted to monographs, edited collections of papers, and articles. The first two of these sections are each divided into three subsections containing books in each of the main areas of research. The third section is divided into 12 subsections, with 10 subject headings for philosophical articles along with two additional subsections for articles in cognitive science and neuroscience. Of course the division is somewhat arbitrary, but I hope that it makes the bibliography easier to use. This bibliography has first been compiled by Thomas Metzinger and David Chalmers to appear in print in two philosophical anthologies on conscious experience (Metzinger 1995a, b). From 1995 onwards it has been continuously updated by Thomas Metzinger, and now is freely available as a PDF-, RTF-, or HTML-file. This bibliography mainly attempts to cover the Anglo-Saxon and German debates, in a non-annotated, fully formatted way that makes it easy to "cut and paste" from the original file. To a certain degree this bibliography also contains items in other languages than English and German - all submissions in other languages are welcome. Last update of current version: July 13th, 2001

Applying science of learning in education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum

The field of specialization known as the science of learning is not, in fact, one field. Science of learning is a term that serves as an umbrella for many lines of research, theory, and application. A term with an even wider reach is Learning Sciences (Sawyer, 2006). The present book represents a sliver, albeit a substantial one, of the scholarship on the science of learning and its application in educational settings (Science of Instruction, Mayer 2011). Although much, but not all, of what is presented in this book is focused on learning in college and university settings, teachers of all academic levels may find the recommendations made by chapter authors of service. The overarching theme of this book is on the interplay between the science of learning, the science of instruction, and the science of assessment (Mayer, 2011). The science of learning is a systematic and empirical approach to understanding how people learn. More formally, Mayer (2011) defined the science of learning as the “scientific study of how people learn” (p. 3). The science of instruction (Mayer 2011), informed in part by the science of learning, is also on display throughout the book. Mayer defined the science of instruction as the “scientific study of how to help people learn” (p. 3). Finally, the assessment of student learning (e.g., learning, remembering, transferring knowledge) during and after instruction helps us determine the effectiveness of our instructional methods. Mayer defined the science of assessment as the “scientific study of how to determine what people know” (p.3). Most of the research and applications presented in this book are completed within a science of learning framework. Researchers first conducted research to understand how people learn in certain controlled contexts (i.e., in the laboratory) and then they, or others, began to consider how these understandings could be applied in educational settings. Work on the cognitive load theory of learning, which is discussed in depth in several chapters of this book (e.g., Chew; Lee and Kalyuga; Mayer; Renkl), provides an excellent example that documents how science of learning has led to valuable work on the science of instruction. Most of the work described in this book is based on theory and research in cognitive psychology. We might have selected other topics (and, thus, other authors) that have their research base in behavior analysis, computational modeling and computer science, neuroscience, etc. We made the selections we did because the work of our authors ties together nicely and seemed to us to have direct applicability in academic settings

The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technologies

Collaborative technologies offer a range of new ways of supporting learning by enabling learners to share and exchange both ideas and their own digital products. This paper considers how best to exploit these opportunities from the perspective of learners' needs. New technologies invariably excite a creative explosion of new ideas for ways of doing teaching and learning, although the technologies themselves are rarely designed with teaching and learning in mind. To get the best from them for education we need to start with the requirements of education, in terms of both learners‘ and teachers‘ needs. The argument put forward in this paper is to use what we know about what it takes to learn, and build this into a pedagogical framework with which to challenge digital technologies to deliver a genuinely enhanced learning experience

An evaluation of the procedures used to assess and remediate the perceived writing difficulties of undergraduate students in the Faculty of Education at Edith Cowan University

The standards of written literacy of teacher-education students at Edith Cowan University are perceived by many staff to be inadequate. The Faculty of Education\u27s response to this perceived inadequacy is to carry out a mandatory skills-based remedial writing programme for students whose literacy competencies are judged to be deficient, The instrument used to assess the students\u27 literacy competencies is the English Skills Assessment test. The students\u27 performances in the various skills which the test purports to measure, also determine the area in which they are given remedial instruction if the results of the test suggest this is necessary. However, many Faculty of Education staff are concerned that there are important conceptual, structural, and organisational inadequacies in students\u27 writing which are not identified by the English Skills Assessment test and, therefore, are not attended to in remediation programmes based on the results generated by this test. This study was an evaluation of the remedial literacy programme conducted by the Faculty of Education at Edith Cowan University. The programme was evaluated from two perspectives (a) a theoretical perspective and (b) a practical perspective. Firstly, the study evaluated the procedures used by the Faculty of Education to diagnose and remediate writing difficulties among its first year student intake by comparing the assumptions underlying those procedures to the assumptions underlying a contemporary perspective of writing and the teaching of writing. This comparison revealed that not only were many of the procedures used by the Faculty ineffectual, but also some of the procedures used had the potential to inhibit the literacy development of its students. Secondly, the study investigated whether the English Skills Assessment test was able to identify (a) all the areas in which students experienced difficulties inwriting and (b) the students who were likely to experience the difficulties. The performances of 426 first year primary and secondary teacher education students attending the Mount Lawley Campus of the Edith Cowan University in the English Skills Assessment test were compared with their performances in a research-essay assignment, carried out as a normal part of their course work. The results of this aspect of the study reinforce the findings of an earlier study (Holbrook & Bourke, 1989) which reported that the English Skills Assessment test neither identified all the areas in which tertiary level students experience difficulty in their real writing nor the students likely to experience difficulties, This study shows that Holbrook and Bourke\u27s findings, which related to narrative text, also applied when students wrote expository text. These results challenge the validity of the Faculty\u27s use of the English Skills Assessment test as a means of identifying students with writing problems and show that any remedial writing programme based solely on the areas identified by the test will have a limited impact on the development of students\u27 written literacy. In addition to the data originally sought for this study, other information came to light which showed the limitations of the way in which the Faculty conceptualises students\u27 literacy needs. The emphasis of this programme is diagnosis and remediation. This conceptualisation has produced a literacy unit which is peripheral to the mainstream academic programme and which teaches the surface features of language in decontextualised, skills-based lessons. As a consequence, the unit: (a) is accorded marginal status by lecturers and students alike, ( b ) bears little relationship to what is happening in other units of the course, and (c) contributes little, if anything, to students\u27 literacy development. It is clear from the findings of this study that the Faculty of Educator\u27s remedial literacy programme contains serious flaws which cannot be rectified by attempting to modify the existing programme, The study concludes by recommending that the Faculty of Education should abandon its existing programme, along with its remedial emphasis, and institute a new programme designed to cater for the literacy needs of all its students. That is, all incoming students should be required to undertake a foundation unit which outlines the Faculty of Education\u27s requirements and expectations of students, and teaches them the structures and processes (reading, writing, and thinking) required for successful learning in Bachelor of Arts (Education) courses

Proceedings of QG2010: The Third Workshop on Question Generation

These are the peer-reviewed proceedings of "QG2010, The Third Workshop on Question Generation". The workshop included a special track for "QGSTEC2010: The First Question Generation Shared Task and Evaluation Challenge". QG2010 was held as part of The Tenth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS2010)

Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?

The potential for machine learning (ML) systems to amplify social inequities and unfairness is receiving increasing popular and academic attention. A surge of recent work has focused on the development of algorithmic tools to assess and mitigate such unfairness. If these tools are to have a positive impact on industry practice, however, it is crucial that their design be informed by an understanding of real-world needs. Through 35 semi-structured interviews and an anonymous survey of 267 ML practitioners, we conduct the first systematic investigation of commercial product teams' challenges and needs for support in developing fairer ML systems. We identify areas of alignment and disconnect between the challenges faced by industry practitioners and solutions proposed in the fair ML research literature. Based on these findings, we highlight directions for future ML and HCI research that will better address industry practitioners' needs.Comment: To appear in the 2019 ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2019

Wiring the Writing Center

As computers have brought important developments to composition studies, writing centers have found themselves creating and improvising applications for their own work and often for the writing programs and institutions in which they live. Online tutorials, websites with an array of downloadable resources for students, scheduling and email possibilities--all of these are becoming common-place among writing centers across the country. However, in spite of impressive work by individual centers, exchange on these topics between and among writing centers has been sporadic. As more writing centers approach getting wired and others continue to upgrade, the need for communication and collaboration becomes ever more obvious, and so does the need to understand theoretical implications of choices made.https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/usupress_pubs/1122/thumbnail.jp

Learning Analytics for Academic Writing through Automatic Identification of Meta-discourse

Effective written communication is an essential skill which promotes educational success for undergraduates. Argumentation is a key requirement of successful writing, which is the most common genre that undergraduates have to write particularly in the social sciences. Therefore, when assessing student writing academic tutors look for students’ ability to present and pursue well-reasoned and strong arguments through scholarly argumentation, which is articulated by meta-discourse. Today, there are some natural language processing systems which automatically detect authors’ rhetorical moves in scholarly texts. Hence, when assessing their students’ essays, educators could benefit from the available automated textual analysis which can detect meta-discourse. However, previous work has not shown whether these technologies can be used to analyse student writing reliably. The aim of this thesis therefore has been to understand how automated analysis of meta-discourse in student writing can be used to support tutors’ essay assessment practices. This thesis evaluates a particular language analysis tool, the Xerox Incremental Parser (XIP) as an exemplar of this type of automated technology. The studies presented in this thesis investigates how tutors define the quality of undergraduate writing and suggests key elements that make for good quality student writing in the social sciences, where XIP seems to work best. This thesis also sets out the changes that needs to be made to the XIP and proposes in what ways its output can be delivered to tutors so that they make use of this output to give feedback on student essays. The findings reported also show problems that academic tutors experience in essay assessment, which potentially could be solved by automated support. However, tutors have preconceptions about the use of automated support. The study revealed that tutors want to be assured that they retain the ‘power’ themselves in any decision of using automated support to overcome these preconceptions