File size: 51,435 Bytes
6fa4bc9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 | {
"paper_id": "R09-1024",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T15:01:00.383617Z"
},
"title": "Learning to Identify Educational Materials",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Samer",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hassan",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of North Texas",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Rada",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mihalcea",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "University of North Texas",
"location": {}
},
"email": ""
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "In this paper, we explore the task of automatically identifying educational materials, by classifying documents with respect to their educative value. Through experiments carried out on a data set of manually annotated documents, we show that the generally accepted notion of a learning object's \"educativeness\" is indeed a property that can be reliably assigned through automatic classification.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "R09-1024",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "In this paper, we explore the task of automatically identifying educational materials, by classifying documents with respect to their educative value. Through experiments carried out on a data set of manually annotated documents, we show that the generally accepted notion of a learning object's \"educativeness\" is indeed a property that can be reliably assigned through automatic classification.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "With the rapid growth of the amount of information available online and elsewhere, it becomes increasingly difficult to identify documents that satisfy the user needs. Current search engines target broad coverage of information, at the cost of providing limited support for well defined verticals.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In particular, an increasingly large number of users, consisting primarily of students, instructors and selftaught learners, are often seeking educational materials online, to use as standalone instructional materials or to supplement existing class resources. The typical solution is to either refer to existing collections of learning materials, which often lack breadth of coverage, or to search the Web using one of the current search engines, which frequently lead to many irrelevant results. For example, as shown later in Section 3, from the top 50 documents returned by a search performed on a major search engine 1 for the query \"tree data structure,\" only four were found to be strongly educative, while as many as 29 documents were found to be non-educative.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we address the task of automatically identifying educational materials. We formulate the task as a text categorization problem, and try to automatically classify the \"educativeness\" of a document (defined as a property that reflects the educative value of a document). Through annotation experiments carried out on a data set of materials from the domain of computer science, we show that the educativeness of a document is a property that can be reliably assigned by human judges. We also identify several features characteristic to educational resources, which can be used to identify the educativeness of a document. We perform a number of classification experiments, and show that the document educativeness can be learned and automatically assigned.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": "1"
},
{
"text": "A learning object is formally defined as \"any entity, digital or non-digital, that may be used for learning, education or training\" [2] , or \"any digital resource that can be reused to support learning\" [12] .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 132,
"end": 135,
"text": "[2]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
},
{
"start": 203,
"end": 207,
"text": "[12]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF11"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Background",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "The idea that a document can have an educative property is widely accepted in the growing body of work dedicated to learning objects. Learning object repositories (e.g., [6, 8] ) target improved access to learning materials through \"sharing and reuse,\" by providing a common interface to entire collections of learning materials that can be shared among students and instructors and can be reused across courses and disciplines. These definitions are representative for the notion of \"educativeness\" as used in this paper.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 170,
"end": 173,
"text": "[6,",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
},
{
"start": 174,
"end": 176,
"text": "8]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Background",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "While there has been a large body of work focused toward Learning Object Metadata harnessing [7, 4, 1], we are not aware of any work that has tried to harness the power of the Web as an educational resource through the automatic identification of learning assets on the Web. The work closest to ours is perhaps [9] , where the authors addressed the problem of finding educational resources on the Web. However, the focus of their work was limited to metadata extraction for a limited set of fine grained properties. Instead, in this paper, we introduce a method to automatically annotate the educativeness property of a document, which can be used to assist learners in their search for educational materials.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 311,
"end": 314,
"text": "[9]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Background",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "It is important to note that the classification of the educativeness of a document cannot be modeled as a genre classification task. While recognizing the educativeness of a document is relatively easy to do with accomplished readers, different educational materials can have major stylistic inconsistencies, which invalidate their membership to a unified genre [3] . For example, a diagram, textbook, and a blog could all serve as useful and educative resources despite their obvious stylistic differences.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 362,
"end": 365,
"text": "[3]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Background",
"sec_num": "2"
},
{
"text": "What is an educational material? The purpose of educational materials is primarily decided by the author or the presenter of the resource, who furthermore decides the target audience and the delivery style (e.g., textbooks, presentation, diagram). While the purpose of the resource is a property that is mainly determined by its author, the strength of the educative resource (\"educativeness\") is a property evaluated cumulatively by the target audience of the resource (e.g., students or educational experts) . Hence, in the construction of our data set and in the evaluations we run, we focus on the educativeness property of a learning resource as determined by the agreement of their potential users (students). Educational materials can be located in a variety of sources and formats, including lectures, tutorials, online books, blog articles, publications, even technical forums or expert networks. Most of these learning objects typically include several of the following components: definitions, examples, questions and answers, diagrams, and illustrations.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Building A Data Set for the Classification of Educational Materials",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "In order to build a data set for the classification of educational materials, we mimic a hypothetical learner who tries to locate and identify learning assets using current online resources. We use a typical search scenario, which involves the use of a search engine with a disambiguated query to identify candidate materials, followed by a filtering step that selects only those materials that have educational relevance.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Building A Data Set for the Classification of Educational Materials",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "We collect a data set covering the domain of computer science. We select fourteen topics frequently addressed in data structures and algorithms courses, as shown in Table 2 . Starting with each of the fourteen topics, a query is constructed and run against the Google search engine, and the top 60 ranked search results are collected. 2 Note that the meaning of some terms can be ambiguous, e.g., \"tree\" or \"list,\" and thus we explicitly disambiguate the query by adding the phrase \"data structure.\" By performing this explicit disambiguation, we can focus on the educativeness property of the documents returned by the search, rather than on the differences that could arise from ambiguities of meaning.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 335,
"end": 336,
"text": "2",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 165,
"end": 172,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": "TABREF3"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Building A Data Set for the Classification of Educational Materials",
"sec_num": "3"
},
{
"text": "We define a set of features largely based on the properties associated with learning objects, as defined in standards such as IEEE LOM [2] . Some of the features are also motivated by previous work on educational metadata [11] . The following features are associated with each document in the data set.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 135,
"end": 138,
"text": "[2]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
},
{
"start": 222,
"end": 226,
"text": "[11]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Properties of Educational Materials",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "To be able to capture the educativeness of a resource, the annotators had to score each page on its overall educative value. This feature serves as the major class of the documents in the data set. The annotators were instructed to evaluate the resource as a necessary asset for a student to understand the topic, and score each document on a four point scale ranging from \"noneducative\" to \"strongly-educative.\"",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Educativeness",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We want to measure how human-assigned relevance can contribute to our task, and see if an accurate (manual) measure of relevance can result in a better identification of learning objects, as compared to the search engine ranking. We measure relevance on a four point scale ranging from \"non-relevant\" to \"very relevant.\"",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Relevance",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The content category is a feature that classifies the type of content found on the target page. We assume that the typical content of a learning object can be categorized into one or more of the following types: Definition: The content presents a textual definition of a concept or any of its associated properties. Example/Use: The content presents examples that help clarify a concept, demonstrative use of a concept, or the use of operations in that concept. (e.g., the queue data structure push and pop operations) Questions & Answers: The content presents a question and answer dialogue, as usually found in technical forums and sometime in blog articles. Illustration: The content presents an illustration of a concept or a process, either through the use of images, or through diagrams.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Content Categories",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Other: This group contains all the other types that do not fit in the previous categories.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Content Categories",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "One of the interesting properties of the learning asset is its source. Under the assumption that the type of the resource can contribute to the document educativeness, the annotators were instructed to choose all the possible types that apply from a pre-compiled list. The list was generated by observing and inspecting the collection of retrieved documents. These types are not mutually exclusive.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Resource Type",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Class webpage: A typical class home page where the teacher would provide lecture notes, tips, quizzes and answers for the class homework. Encyclopedia: A resource for educative materials, representing semi-structured or fully structured knowledge contributed by experts in the field. Blog: Web log or blog represents an online personal journal. It varies in format and purpose and it is an increasing popular online form of self-expression.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Resource Type",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Mailing list/forums: It is a typical example of expert network where users pose their questions to an expert (or group of experts) in the field and receive one or more answers. Usually such content is very technical but not always useful.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Resource Type",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Online book: This category represents electronic books in an online format (e.g., HTML, PDF). Presentation: A demonstrative material that consists of a set of slides or pages, representing the main points to be addressed with respect to a topic. Publication: This group includes scientific publications, such as journal articles, conference proceedings, article abstracts, and patent descriptions. How-To article: This source type addresses the use of a specific concept on a step by step basis.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Resource Type",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Reference manual: A technical reference or manual, which explains the use and the inner workings of a concept (e.g., Java language documentations).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Resource Type",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Other: This category includes all other content (e.g. product catalogs, company homepages)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Resource Type",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Learning objects are very diverse and are subject to the judgment of the learner. An expert in the field needs little introduction to the topic, and may require a high level of technical insight. Instead, the same information might seem non-educative and irrelevant from the perspective of a novice user, who seeks basic fundamentals. To address this problem, we asked the annotators to indicate their expertise in each of the selected topics on a four point scale.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Expertise",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Taken together, all the features defined above are referred to as \"user features,\" and are listed in Table 1 . In addition to these features, for each document in the data set we also collect its search engine ranking and its document type (ppt, pdf, html, doc, etc.). We also calculate the hubness of each page as a ratio of its hyper-linked contents to its original content. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 101,
"end": 109,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF1"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Final Set of Features",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Two judges individually annotated the collected documents based on a set of annotation guidelines. The annotators were required to identify the value associated with all the document features described above, along with the educativeness property of a document. The annotators were instructed to evaluate the resource from a college student perspective, therefore discarding highly technical and specific resources as non-educative or marginally-educative. We measure the inter-annotator agreement by calculating the kappa statistic for the annotations made by the two human annotators. The inter-annotator agreement and the kappa statistic for all the features are shown in Figure 1 .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 675,
"end": 683,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF0"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Agreement Study",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "The final data set is created by asking a third annotator to arbitrate the disagreements among the first two annotators. The final distribution across the educativeness class labels is shown in Table 2 . As seen in the table, the distribution across educative and noneducative classes is relatively balanced with a few exceptions. Topics such as \"queue\" and \"tree\" tend to have more non-educative pages, unlike topics such as \"binary search,\" which tend to have more educative pages. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 194,
"end": 201,
"text": "Table 2",
"ref_id": "TABREF3"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Agreement Study",
"sec_num": "3.3"
},
{
"text": "Using the data set described in the previous section, we experiment with automatic classifiers to annotate the educativeness of a given document. Through these evaluations, we measure the ability of a system to automatically detect and classify documents according to their educative value.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "The four-point scale used for the educativeness annotation allows us to perform both a fine grained and a coarse grained evaluation. In the fine grained evaluation, all four dimensions are considered, and thus we run a four-way classification. In the coarse grained evaluation, we combine the non-educative and marginally educative documents into one class (noneducative), and the educative and strongly educative pages into another class (educative), and run a twoway classification. All the evaluations are conducted using a ten-fold cross validation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "Through our experiments, we seek answers to the following questions:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "1. Can the content of a document be used to classify its educativeness? We evaluate the use of the doc-ument content to learn and detect its educativeness. The content is used to construct a feature representation of each document. The terms appearing in the learning objects serve as features in the learning algorithm, with a weight indicating their frequency in the learning object.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "2. Are the user-features useful for the classification of a document educativeness? We evaluate the selected user features as possible dimensions to learn and detect the educativeness of target examples. We use all the user features summarized in Table 1 to construct a feature vector representation for each learning asset. Since these features were manually assigned by the annotators, these annotations serve as an upper bound on the accuracy that can be achieved by using such features.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 247,
"end": 254,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF1"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "3. Can the content of a document be used to automatically predict the user-features? We run an evaluation where each of the selected user-features serves as its own class. The learning assets in which this feature has been selected by the annotators serve as positive examples, while the documents in which the feature was not encountered serve as negative examples. The content of the documents is used to build the feature vectors. The examples are then used to train a classifier to classify each of the features automatically.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "4. Can the automatically predicted user-features be used to learn and detect the educativeness of a document? Finally, given the set of classifiers generated in the previous experiment, we use their output to construct a machine weighted user-feature representation of the given document. This evaluation is similar to the one relying on manually assigned user-features. However, instead of using the user annotations, we use the output automatically predicted by the classifiers.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "For the experiments, we used two classifiers: Na\u00efve Bayes [5] and SVM [10] , selected based on their performance and diversity of learning methodologies.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 58,
"end": 61,
"text": "[5]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 70,
"end": 74,
"text": "[10]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF9"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Experiments",
"sec_num": "4"
},
{
"text": "We run a first experiment where we use the content of the documents, with minimal pre-processing (tokenization, stopword removal), and classify them with respect to the fine-grained and coarse-grained educativeness class. We use a 10-fold cross validation on the entire data set. The rows labeled with \"document content\" in Tables 3 show the results of this experiment. To answer the first question, these experiments show that the use of raw content is useful and can be effectively used to classify the educativeness of a document. In fact, compared to the baseline of selecting the most common class across all the documents, the content-based classification results in a 22-23% absolute increase in F-measure.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Results",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "Next, we use the manual annotations for the userfeatures to classify the educativeness of a document. The results obtained in this experiment are shown in Table 3 in the rows labeled with \"user-features (manual).\" The results are clearly superior, which answers the second question and suggests the usefulness of these features for the classification of educativeness. Note that these results represent an upper bound for our evaluations, since they rely on manually annotated features. Table 3 : Classification results",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 155,
"end": 162,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 487,
"end": 494,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Results",
"sec_num": "5"
},
{
"text": "Since the user-features seem to exhibit the best performance, next we evaluate the ability of automatically labeling these features using the content of the documents. The accuracy of the automatic classification of the user-features is shown in Figure 2 . Both SVM and Naive Bayes seem to be able to label these features with relatively high accuracy. The lowest performance is achieved for Relevance (50-56% F-measure) and the highest for IsEncyclopedia (86-95% F-measure). This experiment provides an answer to the third question: all the user-features that proved useful for the classification of educativeness can be predicted based on the document content. Finally, we answer the fourth question by running an experiment where the automatically predicted userfeatures are used as input to a classifier to annotate the educativeness of a document. The results obtained in this experiment are shown in Table 3 , under the rows labeled \"user-features (predicted).\" The performance obtained by this classifier shows slight advantage (1-5% absolute increase in F-measure) over the one obtained by using the raw content alone. This indicates that a prediction of high accuracy might help in closing the gap with the upper-bound obtained with the manually annotated user-features. This result can be the basis for future improvements, by seeking improvements in the classification of the individual features prediction (e.g., by using syntactic or semantic features in addition to lexical features).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 246,
"end": 254,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": "FIGREF1"
},
{
"start": 906,
"end": 913,
"text": "Table 3",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Features",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Based on our experiments, we found that the educativeness of a document is a property that can be automatically identified. Not surprisingly, the classification with respect to a set of coarse-grained classes is significantly higher than the fine-grained classification. In terms of features, the raw content of a document was found useful, as were other properties associated with a document (referred to as \"user-features\").",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Discussion",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "To evaluate how each of the user-features contribute to the accuracy of the classification, we measured the information gain associated with each feature based on the manual annotations. Figure 3 shows the feature weights. Not surprisingly, the content categories (e.g., HasDefinition, HasExample, HasIllustration) score the highest, indicating their significant discriminative power. Interestingly, the Relevance feature has a higher discriminative power than the Rank feature, which indicates that the relevance of a document might be a good feature to consider when modeling its educativeness. Other intuitive features such as resource types (e.g., IsHowTo, IsPresentation) seem to also contribute to the classification. Note however that the degree of their contribution might be affected by the implicit dependency on content categories (e.g., pages classified as IsEncyclopedia often include definitions, which also activate the HasDefinition feature). ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 187,
"end": 195,
"text": "Figure 3",
"ref_id": "FIGREF2"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Discussion",
"sec_num": "6"
},
{
"text": "In this paper, we addressed the task of automatically identifying learning materials. We constructed a data set by manually annotating the educativeness of the documents retrieved for fourteen topics in computer science. An annotation experiment carried out on this data set showed that the educativeness of a document is a property that can be reliably assigned by human judges. Moreover, through a number of classification experiments, we showed that the educativeness property can also be automatically assigned, with up to 23% absolute increase in F-measure as compared to the most common class baseline.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "Through our experiments, we identified several promising lines for future research. First, we plan to explore ways of improving the classification accuracy for the individual user-features, as well as ways of combining them with the features extracted from the content of a document, in order to improve the overall accuracy of the classification of educativeness. Second, we plan to carry out larger-scale experiments to explore the portability across different domains.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "The data set introduced in the paper can be downloaded from http://lit.csci.unt.edu/index.php/Downloads",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusion",
"sec_num": "7"
},
{
"text": "Throughout our experiments, we conduct our searches using the Google search engine.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "From the top 60 documents, some had to be removed prior to any further processing, because they were either unreachable or they contained non-English characters.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "The authors are grateful to Carmen Banea and Ravi Sinha for their help with the data annotations.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgments",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Metadata extraction and harvesting",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Greenberg",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Journal of Library Metadata",
"volume": "6",
"issue": "4",
"pages": "59--82",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "J. Greenberg. Metadata extraction and harvesting. Journal of Library Metadata, 6(4):59-82, 2004.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "Draft standard for learning technology -learning object metadata -iso/iec 11404",
"authors": [
{
"first": "W",
"middle": [],
"last": "Hodgins",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Duval",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "W. Hodgins and E. Duval. Draft standard for learning tech- nology -learning object metadata -iso/iec 11404. Technical report, 2002.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "The wheres and whyfores for studying textual genre computationally",
"authors": [
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Karlgren",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2004,
"venue": "Proceedings of the AAAI Fall Symposium of Style and Meaning in Language, Art and Music",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "J. Karlgren. The wheres and whyfores for studying textual genre computationally. In In Proceedings of the AAAI Fall Symposium of Style and Meaning in Language, Art and Music., Washington D.C., 2004.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Categorizing learning objects based on wikipedia as substitute corpus",
"authors": [
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Marek",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Marek. Categorizing learning objects based on wikipedia as substitute corpus.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "A comparison of event models for Naive Bayes text classification",
"authors": [
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mccallum",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "K",
"middle": [],
"last": "Nigam",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1998,
"venue": "Proceedings of AAAI Workshop on Learning for Text Categorization",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "A. McCallum and K. Nigam. A comparison of event models for Naive Bayes text classification. In Proceedings of AAAI Workshop on Learning for Text Categorization, 1998.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Reusable learning objects: a survey of LOM-based repositories",
"authors": [
{
"first": "F",
"middle": [],
"last": "Neven",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Duval",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2002,
"venue": "Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "F. Neven and E. Duval. Reusable learning objects: a survey of LOM-based repositories. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Multimedia, France, 2002.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "Strategies for automatic lom metadata generating in a web-based cscl tool",
"authors": [
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [
"T E"
],
"last": "Pansanato",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"P M"
],
"last": "Fortes",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "WebMedia '05: Proceedings of the 11th Brazilian Symposium on Multimedia and the web",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "1--8",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "L. T. E. Pansanato and R. P. M. Fortes. Strategies for automatic lom metadata generating in a web-based cscl tool. In WebMedia '05: Proceedings of the 11th Brazilian Symposium on Multimedia and the web, pages 1-8, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Learning objects, learning object repositories and learning theory: Preliminary best practices for online courses",
"authors": [
{
"first": "S",
"middle": [
"Smith"
],
"last": "Nash",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2005,
"venue": "Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects",
"volume": "1",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "S. Smith Nash. Learning objects, learning object reposi- tories and learning theory: Preliminary best practices for online courses. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1, 2005.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "Finding educational resources on the web: Exploiting automatic extraction of metadata",
"authors": [
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Thompson",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [],
"last": "Smarr",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "H",
"middle": [],
"last": "Nguyen",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Manning",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2003,
"venue": "ECML Workshop on Adaptive Text Extraction and Mining",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "C. Thompson, J. Smarr, H. Nguyen, and C. Manning. Finding educational resources on the web: Exploiting au- tomatic extraction of metadata. In ECML Workshop on Adaptive Text Extraction and Mining, 2003.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory",
"authors": [
{
"first": "V",
"middle": [],
"last": "Vapnik",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1995,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "V. Vapnik. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. Springer, New York, 1995.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Creating glossaries using pattern-based and machine learning techniques",
"authors": [
{
"first": "E",
"middle": [],
"last": "Westerhout",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "P",
"middle": [],
"last": "Monachesi",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2008,
"venue": "Proceedings of the Sixth International Language Resources and Evaluation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "E. Westerhout and P. Monachesi. Creating glossaries using pattern-based and machine learning techniques. In Pro- ceedings of the Sixth International Language Resources and Evaluation, Marrakech, Morocco, 2008.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Learning Object Design and Sequencing Theory",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Wiley",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 2000,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "D. Wiley. Learning Object Design and Sequencing Theory. PhD thesis, Department of Instructional Psychology and Technology Brigham Young University., 2000.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"text": "Kappa statistic and inter-annotator agreement",
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null
},
"FIGREF1": {
"text": "Classification results for user-features",
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null
},
"FIGREF2": {
"text": "Information gain for user-features",
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null,
"num": null
},
"TABREF1": {
"html": null,
"num": null,
"text": "User features",
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table/>"
},
"TABREF3": {
"html": null,
"num": null,
"text": "Distribution of classes across the topics.",
"type_str": "table",
"content": "<table><tr><td>Number of non-educational (NE), marginally educa-</td></tr><tr><td>tional (ME), educational (E) and strongly educational</td></tr><tr><td>(SE) materials.</td></tr></table>"
}
}
}
} |