Transforming pre-service teacher curriculum: observation through a TPACK lens

This paper will discuss an international online collaborative learning experience through the lens of the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework. The teacher knowledge required to effectively provide transformative learning experiences for 21st century learners in a digital world is complex, situated and changing. The discussion looks beyond the opportunity for knowledge development of content, pedagogy and technology as components of TPACK towards the interaction between those three components. Implications for practice are also discussed. In today’s technology infused classrooms it is within the realms of teacher educators, practising teaching and pre-service teachers explore and address effective practices using technology to enhance learning

Teaching and learning in virtual worlds: is it worth the effort?

Educators have been quick to spot the enormous potential afforded by virtual worlds for situated and authentic learning, practising tasks with potentially serious consequences in the real world and for bringing geographically dispersed faculty and students together in the same space (Gee, 2007; Johnson and Levine, 2008). Though this potential has largely been realised, it generally isn’t without cost in terms of lack of institutional buy-in, steep learning curves for all participants, and lack of a sound theoretical framework to support learning activities (Campbell, 2009; Cheal, 2007; Kluge & Riley, 2008). This symposium will explore the affordances and issues associated with teaching and learning in virtual worlds, all the time considering the question: is it worth the effort

"Why Should I Review This Paper?" Unifying Semantic, Topic, and Citation Factors for Paper-Reviewer Matching

As many academic conferences are overwhelmed by a rapidly increasing number of paper submissions, automatically finding appropriate reviewers for each submission becomes a more urgent need than ever. Various factors have been considered by previous attempts on this task to measure the expertise relevance between a paper and a reviewer, including whether the paper is semantically close to, shares topics with, and cites previous papers of the reviewer. However, the majority of previous studies take only one of these factors into account, leading to an incomprehensive evaluation of paper-reviewer relevance. To bridge this gap, in this paper, we propose a unified model for paper-reviewer matching that jointly captures semantic, topic, and citation factors. In the unified model, a contextualized language model backbone is shared by all factors to learn common knowledge, while instruction tuning is introduced to characterize the uniqueness of each factor by producing factor-aware paper embeddings. Experiments on four datasets (one of which is newly contributed by us) across different fields, including machine learning, computer vision, information retrieval, and data mining, consistently validate the effectiveness of our proposed UniPR model in comparison with state-of-the-art paper-reviewer matching methods and scientific pre-trained language models

The Relationship of Clinical Quality, Performance Improvement, and Internal Risk Scores in Nursing Homes

A clinical quality review (CQR) assessing high-risk areas as staffing, change in condition, and pressure ulcers (PU) was completed in 31 nursing homes. Scores between the assigned clinician and the researcher were analyzed using paired t-tests and Pearson r correlations. Average scores for staffing were reliable, while the PU and change in condition scores were significantly different. Individual staffing, 6 of 9 change in condition, and 9 of 18 PU questions were reliable and consistent. Multiple regressions compared relationships between performance improvement (PI), internal risk, and CQR scores with various results. The internal risk and PI scores were inversely related. Future focus should be on PI, and review of policies and instructions for change in condition and PU areas

Doctor of Philosophy

dissertationManual annotation of clinical texts is often used as a method of generating reference standards that provide data for training and evaluation of Natural Language Processing (NLP) systems. Manually annotating clinical texts is time consuming, expensive, and requires considerable cognitive effort on the part of human reviewers. Furthermore, reference standards must be generated in ways that produce consistent and reliable data but must also be valid in order to adequately evaluate the performance of those systems. The amount of labeled data necessary varies depending on the level of analysis, the complexity of the clinical use case, and the methods that will be used to develop automated machine systems for information extraction and classification. Evaluating methods that potentially reduce cost, manual human workload, introduce task efficiencies, and reduce the amount of labeled data necessary to train NLP tools for specific clinical use cases are active areas of research inquiry in the clinical NLP domain. This dissertation integrates a mixed methods approach using methodologies from cognitive science and artificial intelligence with manual annotation of clinical texts. Aim 1 of this dissertation identifies factors that affect manual annotation of clinical texts. These factors are further explored by evaluating approaches that may introduce efficiencies into manual review tasks applied to two different NLP development areas - semantic annotation of clinical concepts and identification of information representing Protected Health Information (PHI) as defined by HIPAA. Both experiments integrate iv different priming mechanisms using noninteractive and machine-assisted methods. The main hypothesis for this research is that integrating pre-annotation or other machineassisted methods within manual annotation workflows will improve efficiency of manual annotation tasks without diminishing the quality of generated reference standards

Examining Scientific Writing Styles from the Perspective of Linguistic Complexity

Publishing articles in high-impact English journals is difficult for scholars around the world, especially for non-native English-speaking scholars (NNESs), most of whom struggle with proficiency in English. In order to uncover the differences in English scientific writing between native English-speaking scholars (NESs) and NNESs, we collected a large-scale data set containing more than 150,000 full-text articles published in PLoS between 2006 and 2015. We divided these articles into three groups according to the ethnic backgrounds of the first and corresponding authors, obtained by Ethnea, and examined the scientific writing styles in English from a two-fold perspective of linguistic complexity: (1) syntactic complexity, including measurements of sentence length and sentence complexity; and (2) lexical complexity, including measurements of lexical diversity, lexical density, and lexical sophistication. The observations suggest marginal differences between groups in syntactical and lexical complexity.Comment: 6 figure

Expertise Modeling for Matching Papers with Reviewers

An essential part of an expert-nding task, such as matching reviewers to submitted pa- pers, is the ability to model the expertise of a person based on documents. We evaluate several measures of the association between an author in an existing collection of research papers and a previously unseen document. We compare two language model based ap- proaches with a novel topic model, Author- Persona-Topic (APT). In this model, each author can write under one or more \per- sonas, which are represented as indepen- dent distributions over hidden topics. Exam- ples of previous papers written by prospec- tive reviewers are gathered from the Rexa database, which extracts and disambiguates author mentions from documents gathered from the web. We evaluate the models us- ing a reviewer matching task based on human relevance judgments determining how well the expertise of proposed reviewers matches a submission. We nd that the APT topic model outperforms the other models