You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Applied Sciences
  • Article
  • Open Access

19 February 2023

Analysis of the Consistency of Prerequisites and Learning Outcomes of Educational Programme Courses by Using the Ontological Approach

,
,
,
,
and
1
Faculty of Information Technologies, L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, 2 Satpayev str., Astana 010008, Kazakhstan
2
Department of Computer Science, Lublin University of Technology, 36B Nadbystrzycka str., 20-618 Lublin, Poland
3
Higher School of Information Technology and Engineering, Astana International University, 8 Kabanbay Batyr av., Astana 010000, Kazakhstan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Abstract

The article presents the results of the application of an ontological approach to the description of the structure and content of the educational programme, and its subsequent analysis for the consistency of prerequisites and learning outcomes of courses. The practical result of the work is an ontology approach implemented in the Protégé 5.5.0 editor, which reflects the studied disciplines in terms of the skills they form and the entrance requirements (prerequisites) for the qualification of the student. The curriculum model includes sequences of semesters and courses of study (academic year) related by time relationships. The developed ontology approach is filled with data from the educational programme “Software Engineering”. The authors have earned queries in DL Query and SPARQL languages, which, using logical inference procedures, make it possible to analyse an educational programme for consistency of disciplines in terms of input requirements and the skills of the learner formed during the training period. The developed ontology and rules of logical inference can be used as a part of the educational process management information systems and educational programme designers, for the intellectual analysis of programme integrity and the consistency of learning prerequisites and outcomes in disciplines.

1. Introduction

Information technology plays a vital role in modern education, just as in many other fields of activity. Effective management of an educational organisation is impossible without using educational process management information systems. Classical information systems based on relational databases allow the automation of typical accounting and analytical procedures. Such procedures include managing the staff of the organisation and the contingent of students, planning the workload and schedule of classes, and accounting for the progress and academic achievements of learners. At the same time, the situation is much worse with the management of the content of educational programmes. In most educational organisations, informatisation tools for working with such entities as “curriculum” or “course curriculum” have been successfully implemented and are being used. Despite this, management procedures are usually limited to taking into account training courses and their formal attributes—the amount of time to study, forms of control, positions in the curriculum, etc. At best, the system will provide a list of topics studied in the course, which, however, is practically not suitable for any computer analysis. This is a consequence of the fact that the information systems mentioned do not solve the problem of managing the educational content. The situation is slightly better in LMSs (Learning Management Systems) designed to deliver educational content and interactive work of trainees. Despite better structuring, LMSs in most cases still use “flat” models of educational content description, which do not allow reflection on the relationship of individual didactic units, both within one course and between different ones. The main problem of most implemented systems and tools for educational purposes is the lack of a formal representation of the content semantics.
According to the authors, to solve the problem of managing educational content at a meaningful, semantic level, it is necessary to use relevant technologies and techniques, which includes the so-called ontological approach. It consists of presenting the content of learning in the form of a semantic network. The ontological approach implements the knowledge model of information representation, which defines universal ways of presenting the semantics of educational content. Semantic technologies represent the next step in developing machine-readable ways of presenting information. They make it possible to implement models of information representation and processing methods, the logic of which is similar to human thinking, which allows the use of intelligent inference procedures.
The ontological approach is based on the representation of any information in the form of a semantic graph of any structure, whose nodes are concepts and the edges are relations. At the formal level, an ontology is a system consisting of a set of approaches and theorems about them, on the basis of which classes, relations, functions and units can be described. Informally, an ontology is a view of the world regarding a specific area of interest. This description consists of terms and rules of their use limiting their meaning in a specific area.

3. Research Questions

The consideration presented in the Introduction chapter, and the results of the literature review allowed the formulation of the following research questions:
Q1.
Is it possible to build, using an object-oriented approach, a detailed ontological model of an educational programme that combines courses, skills, and training periods?
Q2.
Is it possible to automate the analysis of the consistency of course prerequisites and learning outcomes of an educational programme and its ontological model with the use of appropriate software?
Q3.
Can the developed ontological model of the educational programme be easily integrated with the Learning Management Systems software?

4. Methodologies Used

The primary way to represent semantic information is a triplet—a syntactic structure consisting of three elements: subject, predicate, and object (Figure 1). A triplet can express a connection between two concepts, semantics which is defined by a predicate, for example “Course–Require–Skill”. In addition, the subject property can act as a predicate, and the value of this property can act as an object, for example “Course–Has-name–Java Script Programming”. Either an entity or a literal (numeric or string value) can act as an object.
Figure 1. Triplet—the basic unit of semantic information representation.
An essential part of the semantic model is the principle of the uniqueness of object names. In the Semantic Web concept, it is customary for these names to have the form URI (Uniform Resource Identifier).
The most famous application of the ontological approach is the Semantic Web project—semantic web. This is a concept for the development of a web environment for the introduction of metadata into information that allows to store and process the semantics of documents. In addition, using special tools for data extraction will allow for not contextual but “semantic search”, i.e., looking for an answer to a question and using logical inference. Semantic Web technologies can also be used in other areas—for system integration, description, the cataloguing of information resources, and the creation of intelligent software agents.
The ontological approach has several advantages in the implementation of information models of poorly formalised subject areas, which include the content of the educational programme:
  • The “transparency” of the data model, which provides for its expansion by adding new concepts and relationships throughout the system’s life cycle.
  • The ability to model complex relationships and the use of logical inference.
  • The usage of agreed (shared by all) terminology with precisely defined semantics.

5. Development of an Ontological Model of an Educational Programme

5.1. Skills and Courses Model

An educational programme is a set of interrelated training courses designed to teach (train) any skills (skill). Obtaining a skill usually requires the presence of other skills in the trainee. If we consider this in the example of a fragment of the bachelor’s degree programme “Software Engineering,” then, for example, obtaining object-oriented programming requires the skills of basic programming, procedural-oriented programming and algorithmisation.
Each course trains the learner in some skills and, in turn, requires the learner to have certain skills to start training. By the logic of the educational process, the required skills (prerequisites) of the student are trained in previously studied courses. Since the trained skills can be arbitrarily distributed among courses, the relationships between the trained skills and the input requirements (prerequisites) form an oriented acyclic graph (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Transitivity of skills and their relation to disciplines (an example).
The dependence of one skill on another is transitive (Figure 2)—if skill B requires skill A, and skill C requires skill B, then skill C requires skill A. Since Course 2 is aimed at acquiring skills B and C by trainees, then, from the point of view of Course 2, skill A is an input requirement (prerequisite) for this course.

5.2. Model of Training Periods

The model defines two classes that are subclasses of the TimeInterval class—AcademicYear and Semester, which are connected by the includes/isPartOf relationship. To determine the sequence of intervals that follow directly, the TimeInterval class, and hence its child classes, is bound by two mutually inverse properties (object properties)—precede and followBy. These properties are not transitive. To determine the relations in a time of a more general nature—which of the intervals follows earlier and which later, regardless of the “distance” between them—two super properties are defined—goesBefore and goesAfter. The superpowers goesBefore and goesAfter are transitive. Thus, any period in the chain of periods linked by the follow By/precede relationship with its neighbours will be linked to the remaining periods by the goesBefore and goesAfter relationships (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Relations between concepts—time periods.
For the goesBefore/goesAfter relationship between AcademicYear containers to also extend to the relationship between semesters and the relationship between the AcademicYear container and the semester, it is necessary to build an appropriate chain of relationships: isPartOf -> goesBefore = goesBefore (see Figure 4).
Figure 4. Definition of the Object Properties chain for the connection of AcademicYear and Semester in time.
The concept of “Course” is connected with the semester by the functional property “studiedDuring” and the inverse property “provideStudy”.
The diagram of classes and properties obtained using the ProtégéVOWL plugin is shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5. Semantic network graph describing the relationship between course, semester and skills.

5.3. An Example of Ontological Model Developed

The developed ontological model of the educational programme was implemented in the ontological editor Protégé 5.5.0. As an example, the model was filled with data describing a fragment of the bachelor’s degree programme “Software Engineering”. Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8 show the structure of the classes of the implemented ontology, the list of instances (individuals), and the hierarchy of object properties. In Figure 7, the names of individuals belonging to the Course class have a three-digit prefix of the form “999_”.
Figure 6. Class hierarchy of the ontology developed.
Figure 7. Individuals of the ontology developed.
Figure 8. Hierarchy of object properties.
The complete ontological graph of the developed ontology, including classes, individuals, and properties, is shown in Figure 9. This graph was automatically generated by the Protégé software based on the ontology model (Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8). It presents a high degree of complexity of the developed model and is used here for demonstration purposes.
Figure 9. The complete graph of the ontology of the educational programme.

5.4. Analysis of the Consistency of Course Prerequisites and Learning Outcomes

The developed ontological model makes it possible to analyse the educational programme with various goals. The SPARQL query language is the most effective and flexible tool for extracting data from an ontology. It allows to operate with data sets extracted from an ontology, as with sets of elements. This makes SPARQL similar to the SQL query language used for relational databases. The peculiarity of the implementation of this language in the Protégé editor is that SPARQL does not perform calculations using the results of logical inference (reasoning). To solve this problem, it is necessary to save all the axioms obtained using reasoner (inferred axioms) as a separate ontology.
For example, the query for obtaining a complete set of all input requirements for skills developed during the study of subjects in semester 4th looks like this:requiredBy some (trainedBy some (studiedDuring value Semester_4)).
The query’s results in the form of a list of individuals of the Skill class are shown in Figure 10.
Figure 10. The list of skills that are the entrance requirements for the courses of the 4th semester.
To assess the consistency of the educational programme in terms of the disciplines studied during the 4th semester, it is necessary to make sure that all the required skills (Figure 10) will be formed in the student during the previous semesters 1–3. The list of skills formed during all semesters preceding the fourth one can be obtained using the following query in the DLQuery language:
trainedBy some (studiedDuring some (goesBefore value Semester_4)).
The query’s results in the form of a list of individuals of the Skill class are shown in Figure 11.
Figure 11. The list of skills acquired by the student during the study of courses preceding the 4th semester.
To assess the consistency of the educational programme, it is necessary to compare the acquired skill sets. From this comparison, it can be seen that not all the skills necessary for studying the 4th semester courses (Figure 10) are present in the set of skills acquired by the student earlier (Figure 11), which means that the educational programme in this part is not coordinated. The DL Query language does not allow operating to obtain the difference of sets. You can use the SPARQL query language to get an explicit set of skills included in the first set, but it is not included in the second. The peculiarity of this language implementation in the Protégé editor is that SPARQL does not perform calculations using the results of logical inference (reasoning).
The results of the query in the form of a list of individuals of the Skill class are shown in Figure 12. These results show that the inconsistency of the programme lies in the fact that two skills from the set of skills of the entrance requirements of the 4th semester courses are not provided by them in previous semesters.
Figure 12. The list of skills that cause inconsistency in the educational programme in the 4th semester.
Figure 13 shows a SPARQL query that receives a list of all courses in the curriculum with an indication of the semester. Figure 14 shows a query that receives all the skills generated by the curriculum courses, indicating the semester.
Figure 13. The list of courses in the curriculum with the indication of the semester.
Figure 14. Skills formed by the courses of the curriculum with the indication of the semester.
The essential stage of the analysis of the educational programme is the consistency of the input requirements imposed by any course to the learner’s skills (prerequisites), and the learner’s skills acquired during the study of previous courses. To do this, we will obtain a list of sets of all input requirements for skills formed during the study of courses of each semester. The corresponding SPARQL query and the result of its execution are shown in Figure 15. The results show that each subsequent semester includes the prerequisites of all previous semesters due to the transitivity of the required property (Figure 15).
Figure 15. Entrance requirements (prerequisites) of the curriculum courses with the indication of the semester.
The next result of the analysis is to find the skills that cause inconsistency in the educational programme for each semester. To assess the consistency of the educational programme in terms of the disciplines studied during a certain semester, it is necessary to make sure that all the required skills will be formed in the student during the previous semesters. To do this, it is important to find the difference in each semester between the entrance requirements of the courses of each semester and the set of skills acquired by the student before the beginning of this semester. The SPARQL query that solves this problem and the result of its execution is shown in Figure 16.
Figure 16. List of skills that cause inconsistency in the educational programme.
Figure 16 shows that the inconsistency of the programme lies in the fact that there are seven skills from the set of input requirements of courses in semesters 1, 3, and 4 that are not provided by the courses of the previous semesters.
The described methodology and technology for checking the consistency of the educational programme will work for any number of training periods, as well as for any arbitrary structure of skill dependencies and any degree of their detail.

6. Results and Discussion

The main results of the work performed are as follows:
(1) An analysis of scientific publications devoted to the use of semantic technologies for modelling educational programmes was carried out. Typical disadvantages of the proposed ontological models are revealed. They mainly consist of the fact that the developed models are poorly adapted for using logical inference tools, and the practice of such application has not been investigated. In addition, the existing models are constructed mainly using a limited set of roles (relationships) that reflect only the structure of the educational programme. They do not describe the relationship between concepts over time and the content of the educational process.
(2) An ontological model of the educational programme has been developed, reflecting the studied courses in terms of the skills they form and the entrance requirements (prerequisites) for the student’s qualification. The model provides for the interrelationships of training periods over time, allowing to operate with sequences of study courses.
(3) SPARQL queries have been developed that allow analysing the educational programme for consistency of the input requirements of the courses and the skills of the student formed during the previous training period. The result of the queries is a subset of skills that relate to the input requirements of a certain training period, but were not formed during previous training periods.
The conducted research made it possible to answer the research questions posed.
Q1.
Is it possible to build, using an object-oriented approach, a detailed ontological model of an educational programme that combines courses, skills, and training periods?
The answer to this research question is: YES, we did it. It should only be noted that for real cases (eg a four-year educational programme with a large number of courses, skills and training periods), the developed models are very complex and difficult to use.
Q2.
Is it possible to automate the analysis of the consistency of course prerequisites and learning outcomes of an educational programme and its ontological model with the use of appropriate software?
The answer to this question is also: YES. Specialized software was used in the work not only to build the model, but also to explore it quite easily and automatically. A special query language for logical reasoning was used: SPARQL.
Q3.
Can the developed ontological model of the educational programme be easily integrated with the Learning Management Systems software?
The answer to this question is: NO. LMSs mostly use relational database management systems in the data layer. Meanwhile, SPARQL queries cannot be easily implemented in this technology, i.e., in Structured Query Language (SQL). The implementation or integration of both technologies will require separate research.

7. Conclusions

This article uses an ontological approach to develop the ontological model of the educational programme. The model represents the curriculum’s structure as a sequence of courses being studied. The skills formed in the learning process are determined for each course, as well as the skills that are the input requirements for the student. The authors pay great attention to the semantic modelling of concepts describing the sequence and nesting of time intervals that are periods of learning.
The model’s major purpose is to analyse the consistency of the curriculum. The condition of the curriculum’s consistency is met if all the skills required to start studying the courses of any semester were formed during the study of the courses of the previous semesters. The authors demonstrated the solution to this problem using a logical inference machine (reasoner) and query execution in SPARQL. The proposed approach can be used not only to analyse the consistency of a separate educational programme, but also for a comparative analysis of programmes among themselves.
The effectiveness of using semantic technologies to analyse the consistency of the curriculum is due to the graph nature of the ontological model. The ontological model makes it possible to model a complex structure of connections, as well as to obtain a result in conditions of incomplete information about the simulated subject area using the mathematical apparatus of descriptive logic. The demonstrated advantages of the ontological approach will manifest themselves the more complex the semantic model of the domain will be from the point of the topology of connections and more voluminous from the number of concepts.
The ontological model proposed by the authors can be reduced to more fully and adequately reflect the subject area and expand it. One of the ways to refine the model may be the implementation of new conditions for the consistency of the curriculum. Additional consistency conditions may consider the volume of the training course, its classification in terms of the curriculum, the types of training sessions provided by the course, and others. It is also possible to implement in the model the division of skills into theoretical knowledge and practical skills.
The semantic approach gives excellent opportunities for multi-faceted analysis of educational programmes, but has significant limitations in practical application. Virtually all educational process management systems are built using relational databases. Solving the described problem using a relational data model will be possible only with a limited number of training periods and a limited length of skill dependency chains, since the SQL relational database query language does not allow recursive queries. This is the subject of future research.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.N. and M.M.; methodology, A.N. and G.B.; software, A.N., A.O. and G.A.; validation, M.M., G.B. and A.M.; formal analysis, G.B.; investigation, A.N. and A.O.; resources, A.N.; data curation, A.N.; writing—original draft preparation, A.N. and G.B.; writing—review and editing, M.M.; visualization, A.N. and A.M.; supervision, M.M.; project administration, A.N.; funding acquisition, A.N. and M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The APC was funded by the Lublin University of Technology Scientific Fund FD-20/IT-3/007.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kurzaeva, L.V.; Povitukhin, S.A.; Usataya, T.V.; Usatiy, D.U. The Development of Ontological Model for Increasing the Competitiveness of University Graduates in Information Technologies. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1691, 012003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Aksenov, A.; Borisov, V.; Shadrin, D.; Porubov, A.; Kotegova, A.; Sozykin, A. Competencies Ontology for the Analysis of Educational Programs. In Proceedings of the Ural Symposium on Biomedical Engineering, Radioelectronics and Information Technology (USBEREIT) 2020 Conference, Yekaterinburg, Russia, 14–15 May 2020; Available online: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9117793 (accessed on 12 January 2023).
  3. Sánchez Gálvez, L.A.; Anzures García, M.; Campos Gregorio, Á. Weighted Bidirectional Graph-Based Academic Curricula Model to Support the Tutorial Competence. Computación y Sistemas 2020, 24, 619–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Mandić, M. Semantic Web Based Software Platform for Curriculum Harmonization. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Web Intelligence, Mining and Semantics, Novi Sad, Serbia, 25–27 June 2018; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Protégé. Available online: https://protege.stanford.edu/ (accessed on 12 January 2023).
  6. Piedra, N.; Caro, E.T. LOD-CS2013: Multileaming through a Semantic Representation of IEEE Computer Science Curricula. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain, 17–20 April 2018; pp. 1939–1948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Quezada-Sarmiento, P.A.; Elorriaga, J.A.; Arruarte, A.; Jumbo-Flores, L.A. Used of Web Scraping on Knowledge Representation Model for Bodies of Knowledge as a Tool to Development Curriculum. In Trends and Applications in Information Systems and Technologies; Rocha, Á., Adeli, H., Dzemyda, G., Moreira, F., Ramalho Correia, A.M., Eds.; WorldCIST 2021. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (AISC 2021); Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 1366, pp. 611–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Aeiad, E.; Meziane, F. An Adaptable and Personalised E-Learning System Applied to Computer Science Programmes Design. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2018, 24, 1485–1509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Burgueño, L.; Ciccozzi, F.; Famelis, M.; Kappel, G.; Lambers, L.; Mosser, S.; Paige, R.F.; Pierantonio, A.; Rensink, A.; Salay, R.; et al. Contents for a Model-Based Software Engineering Body of Knowledge. Softw. Syst. Model. 2019, 18, 3193–3205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Stancin, K.; Poscic, P.; Jaksic, D. Ontologies in Education—State of the Art. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2020, 25, 5301–5320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Demchenko, Y.; Stoy, L. Research Data Management and Data Stewardship Competences in University Curriculum. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Vienna, Austria, 21–23 April 2021; pp. 1717–1726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chung, H.-S.; Kim, J.-M. Semantic Model of Syllabus and Learning Ontology for Intelligent Learning System. In Computational Collective Intelligence. Technologies and Applications; Hwang, D., Jung, J.J., Nguyen, N.T., Eds.; ICCCI 2014; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; Volume 8733, pp. 175–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Demchenko, Y.; Comminiello, L.; Reali, G. Designing Customisable Data Science Curriculum Using Ontology for Data Science Competences and Body of Knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Big Data and Education, London, UK, 30 March–1 April 2019; pp. 124–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Katis, E.; Kondylakis, H.; Agathangelos, G.; Vassilakis, K. Developing an Ontology for Curriculum and Syllabus. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 2018, 11155, 55–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Seitz, P. Curriculum Alignment among the Intended, Enacted, and Assessed Curricula for Grade 9 Mathematics. J. Can. Assoc. Curric. Stud. 2017, 15, 72–94. [Google Scholar]
  16. Bay, E. Developing a Scale on “Factors Regarding Curriculum Alignment”. J. Educ. Train. Stud. 2016, 4, 8–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Wijngaards-de Meij, L.; Merx, S. Improving Curriculum Alignment and Achieving Learning Goals by Making the Curriculum Visible. Int. J. Acad. Dev. 2018, 23, 219–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Shaltry, C. A New Model for Organizing Curriculum Alignment Initiatives. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2020, 44, 658–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Zhu, Y.; Zhang, W.; He, Y.; Wen, J.; Li, M. Design and Implementation of Curriculum Knowledge Ontology-Driven SPOC Flipped Classroom Teaching Model. Educ. Sci. Theory Pract. 2018, 18, 1351–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Elsayed, E. Interaction with Content through the Curriculum Lifecycle. In Proceedings of the 2009 Ninth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Riga, Latvia, 15–17 July 2009; pp. 730–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sarmiento, C.; Duarte, O.; Barrera, M.; Soto, R. Semi-Automated Academic Tutor for the Selection of Learning Paths in a Curriculum: An Ontology Based Approach. In Proceedings of the IEEE 8th International Conference on Engineering Education, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 7–8 December 2016; pp. 223–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Katis, E. Semantic Modeling of Educational Curriculum and Syllabus. Master’s Thesis, School of Applied Technology, Create, Greece, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  23. Chung, H.; Kim, J. An Ontological Approach for Semantic Modeling of Curriculum and Syllabus in Higher Education. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2016, 6, 365–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Raud, Z.; Vodovozov, V.; Petlenkov, E.; Serbin, A. Ontology-Based Design of Educational Trajectories. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 59th International Scientific Conference on Power and Electrical Engineering of Riga Technical University (RTUCON), Riga, Latvia, 12–13 November 2018; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wu, L.; Liu, Q.; Zhou, W.; Mao, G.; Huang, J.; Huang, H. A Semantic Web-Based Recommendation Framework of Educational Resources in E-Learning. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 2018, 25, 811–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Poulakakis, Y.; Vassilakis, K.; Kalogiannakis, M.; Panagiotakis, S. Ontological approach of Educational Resources: A Proposed Implementation for Greek Schools. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2016, 22, 1737–1755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ouf, S.; Abd Ellatif, M.; Salama, S.E.; Helmy, Y. A Proposed Paradigm for Smart Learning Environment Based on Semantic Web. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 72, 796–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Mrhar, K.; Douimi, O.; Abik, M.; Benabdellah, N.C. Towards a Semantic Integration of Data from Learning Platforms. IAES Int. J. Artif. Intell. (IJ-AI) 2020, 9, 535–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Renzella, J.; Cain, A.; Schneider, J.-G. Verifying Student Identity in Oral Assessments with Deep Speaker. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell. 2021, 3, 100044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Khadir, A.C.; Aliane, H.; Guessoum, A. Ontology Learning: Grand Tour and Challenges. Comput. Sci. Rev. 2021, 39, 100339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Tapia-Leon, M.; Rivera, A.C.; Chicaiza, J.; Luján-Mora, S. Application of Ontologies in Higher Education: A Systematic Mapping Study. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain, 17–20 April 2018; pp. 1344–1353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Xia, X.; Qi, W. Temporal Tracking and Early Warning of Multi Semantic Features of Learning Behavior. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell. 2022, 3, 100045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kay, J.; Bartimote, K.; Kitto, K.; Kummerfeld, B.; Liu, D.; Reimann, P. Enhancing Learning by Open Learner Model (OLM) Driven Data Design. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell. 2022, 3, 100069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Biggs, J. Enhancing Teaching through Constructive Alignment. High. Educ. 1996, 32, 347–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Biggs, J. What the Student Does: Teaching for Enhanced Learning. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 1999, 18, 57–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Biggs, J.; Tang, C.S.K. Train-The-Trainers: Implementing Outcomes-Based Teaching and Learning in Malaysian Higher Education. Malays. J. Learn. Instr. 2011, 8, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Viswanathan, N.; Meacham, S.; Adedoyin, F.F. Enhancement of Online Education System by Using a Multi-Agent Approach. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell. 2022, 3, 100057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ali, S.; Hafeez, Y.; Humayun, M.; Jamail, N.S.M.; Aqib, M.; Nawaz, A. Enabling Recommendation System Architecture in Virtualized Environment for E-Learning. Egypt. Inform. J. 2022, 23, 33–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Baker, R.S.; Gašević, D.; Karumbaiah, S. Four Paradigms in Learning Analytics: Why Paradigm Convergence Matters. Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell. 2021, 2, 100021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Heiyanthuduwage, S.R. A Review: Status Quo and Current Trends in E-Learning Ontologies. In Mobility for Smart Cities and Regional Development—Challenges for Higher Education; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 114–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Dushutina, E.V. Curriculum Development Approach—The Case of Computing Education. In Knowledge in the Information Society; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 151–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Praserttitipong, D.; Srisujjalertwaja, W. Elective Course Recommendation Model for Higher Education Program. Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol. 2018, 40, 1232–1239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Spasennikov, V.; Morozova, A. Accreditation Examination of Developing Professional Competencies at the University: A Mathematical Model. In Proceedings of the International Science and Technology “Conference FarEastCon 2019”, Vladivostok, Russia, 29 October 2019; pp. 223–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Clear, A.; Clear, T.; Vichare, A.; Charles, T.; Frezza, S.; Gutica, M.; Lunt, B.; Maiorana, F.; Pears, A.; Pitt, F.; et al. Designing Computer Science Competency Statements: A Process and Curriculum Model for the 21st Century. In Proceedings of the ITiCSE ’20: Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Trondheim, Norway, 17–18 June 2020; pp. 211–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Bekmanova, G.; Nazyrova, A.; Omarbekova, A.; Sharipbay, A. The Model of Curriculum Constructor. In Proceedings of the Computational Science and Its Applications—ICCSA 2021—21st International Conference, Cagliari, Italy, 13–16 September 2021; pp. 459–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.