Patent Application
20180218626
This application claims priority from Singapore Patent Application No. 10201505840U filed on 27 Jul. 2015.
The following discloses method and system arrangements for dynamically optimized courses of learning.
A number of scientific research studies exist which document and describe experiments of techniques and methods that improve learning. Also exist are a number of scientific research studies which describe techniques and frameworks to measure the effectiveness of learning. However, learning environments and even individual learner circumstances are oftentimes very unique. What may be highly effective in a laboratory under controlled settings or in a particular experiment in the field for a particular learner or a particular group of learners may not be translatable to different types of learners in different settings.
Thus, what is needed is a method and system for dynamically evolving courses of learning in accordance with various specific learning environments to optimize cerebral learning and learning effectiveness.
According to a first aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a method for dynamically optimized course of learning, the method comprises creating a learning environment profile of target learners of a target course, wherein the learning environment profile comprises one or more sets of data collected from the target learners and one or more teachers of the target course; establishing a plurality of parameters for optimizing cerebral learning for the target learners in response to the one or more sets of data; optimizing the course of learning in accordance with the plurality of parameters; presenting the optimized course of learning on one or more of the target learners; measuring the cerebral learning of the one or more target learners of the optimized course of learning to arrive at an effectiveness feedback (EFK) of the plurality of parameters; and refining one or more of the plurality of parameters to dynamically optimize the course of learning when the effectiveness feedback falls below a predetermined threshold.
According to a second aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a system for dynamically optimized course of learning. The system comprises at least one target learner and is configured to create a learning environment profile of target learners of a target course provided by an organization, wherein the learning environment profile comprises one or more sets of data collected from the target learners, the organization and one or more teachers of the target course; establish a plurality of parameters for optimizing a cerebral course of learning for the target learners in response to the one or more sets of data; optimize the course of learning in accordance with the plurality of parameters; present the optimized course of learning on one or more of the target learners; measure the cerebral learning of the one or more target learners of the optimized course of learning to arrive at an EFK of the plurality of parameters; and refine one or more of the plurality of parameters to dynamically optimize the course of learning when the effectiveness feedback falls below a predetermined threshold.
The accompanying figures, where like reference numerals refer to identical or functionally similar elements throughout the separate views and which together with the detailed description below are incorporated in and form part of the specification, serve to illustrate various embodiments and to explain various principles and advantages in accordance with a present embodiment.
As illustrated in
In more detail, the disclosed method of the present application starts with a step of profiling a learning environment of target learners. In an embodiment, a series of questions is asked to form learning environment profiles for the target learners. The series of questions is designed to focus on a plurality of relevant elements involved in a target course of the target learners. For example, the relevant elements may comprise demographic information regarding learners, objectives, organization(s), teacher(s), and tools. It is understandable to the skilled person that one or more of these elements is used in creating the learning environment profiles.
In accordance with one aspect of the present embodiment, the following questions are asked to elicit demographic information on the target learners. These questions are for illustration purposes and should not be considered limiting. It is understandable to a skilled person in the art that there are other questions not illustrated herein that can also be used as profiling questions:
In the present embodiment, the following questions are asked to elicit demographic information on the objectives. These questions are for illustration purposes and should not be considered limiting. It is understandable to a skilled person in the art that there are other questions not illustrated herein can also be used as profiling questions:
In the present embodiment, the following questions are asked to elicit further demographic information on the organizations and their learning goals. These questions are for illustration purposes and should not be considered limiting. It is understandable to a skilled person in the art that there are other questions not illustrated herein can also be used as profiling questions:
In the present embodiment, the following questions are asked regarding the teacher's objectives. These questions are for illustration purposes and should not be considered limiting. It is understandable to a skilled person in the art that there are other questions not illustrated herein can also be used as profiling questions:
In the present embodiment, the following questions are asked concerning the tools available for the target course. These questions are for illustration purposes and should not be considered limiting. It is understandable to a skilled person in the art that there are other questions not illustrated herein can also be used as profiling questions:
The responses to the questions on each of the above Elements are referred to herein as sets of data.
After the learning environment profiles of the target learners are created 102, a plurality of parameters for optimizing cerebral learning for the target learners are established 104 in response to the sets of data collected from answers of the above questions concerning one or more of the relevant elements. The plurality of parameters are also considered as ‘levers’ of the disclosed dynamically optimized course of learning. The plurality of parameters are described below. It is understandable to a skilled person in the art that there may be other levers that are not described herein but can also be used as relevant parameters, i.e. levers, to dynamically optimize the course of learning.
Amongst the plurality of parameters in the present embodiment, the first lever is goal setting. Motivation is an essential element to beginning and sustaining learning. It begins with being clear on what it is that the learners want to achieve. In other words, it's about setting goals. Starting a target course with the end in mind materially affects the learning result. The key word in goal setting is ‘mind’: visualizing and developing a concrete sense of the goal goes a long way to build motivation. All learning begins with a desire. A goal is the aim of an action that a person consciously desires to achieve. Therefore, goal setting is an important cognitive process affecting self-confidence and motivation.
Goals and plans to achieve those goals will lay a strong foundation for the learners' motivation for learning. Visualizing goals is, in fact, the initial path to motivation and learning. After all, a learner cannot get started if they do not know what they want to accomplish.
If the learners do not develop goals consciously and for themselves they risk becoming adrift and the goals are a result not of their desires but because of other causes: for example, a need for acceptance, parental desire, etc. Students who set a goal or work towards a goal set by others develop confidence when they hit that goal. It makes them more interested and motivated in persisting with their efforts to learn. They work harder and engage more to attain the next goal. This in turn promotes a positive cycle.
Amongst the plurality of parameters in the present embodiment, the second lever is self-organization to meet goals. Building the above described cycle with goals, motivation and performance requires self-discipline and self-organization. Having a goal is one thing but to meet goals and develop a sustainable learning cycle requires self-regulation. It requires planning, organization, and discipline to adhere to the path of the target learning.
Amongst the plurality of parameters in the present embodiment, an example of the third lever is the art of practice. Practice is conventionally recognized as a vital part of the learning process. But what is not fully recognized is that practice is not just doing the same thing over and over. The art of practice in the present embodiment focuses primarily on areas in which the learners are least competent and less in areas where the learners are already proficient.
Amongst the plurality of parameters in the present embodiment, an example of the fourth lever is the art of recall. Rereading of material is a form of recall. However, it is known that mere rereading of material is not as good as closing the book and then trying to remember what was learnt. Therefore, rereading material is not the art of recall preferred in the present embodiment. Testing is another form of recall. The testing effect refers to a boost in the long-term retention of information as a result of taking a test. Hence, testing is a preferred art of recall in accordance with the present embodiment. It is also understandable that testing may be a reinforcement step to practice.
Amongst the plurality of parameters in the present embodiment, an example of the fifth lever is spacing of learning. The following questions are considered in view of spacing of learning: How can the learners use repetition to their advantage? What is the most advantageous way to space their study sessions? Conventionally, the best time to re-read or repeat studying is when the learners have almost forgotten the subject. This lever can be applied according to different conditions of the learners with respect to when and how to repeat.
Amongst the plurality of parameters in the present embodiment, a sixth lever may be the art of mixing. In virtually every type of course or sport that the learners study or learn there are many topics and subtopics, be it a course on the heart or the nervous system, or English Grammar or calculus or a sport like baseball. Most of the learners study in a manner that firstly focuses on one topic; then, when they have completed that topic, they move to the next topic. It may seem that the best way to learn multiple topics is to study one topic thoroughly before moving to the next. The process appears natural and is one that the learners are accustomed to. However, this intuition is a fallacy. In accordance with the present embodiment, this sixth lever, the art of mixing, is introduced to mix up material the learners learn within and across subjects so as to enhance learning.
Amongst the plurality of parameters in the present embodiment, a seventh lever may be learning with friends. Generally, humans have always learned from each other and from their interaction with the world around them. Looking into daily experience, children pick up behaviours just by watching videos or cartoons and, conversely, reduce their inclination to imitate that behaviour if they see punishment for that behaviour. Even as adults, people learn constantly by their engagement with peers and other adults, even through links to the cyber world. In the present embodiment, this rule (learning with others/friends) can make the course of learning more productive and is considered as a valuable parameter in optimizing the course of learning.
Amongst the plurality of parameters in the present embodiment, an eighth lever may be the art of knowledge extension. In times past, the best medical students and those predicted to be successful would be those individuals who accumulated the most amount of factual knowledge that they could and then apply it in taking care of patients. This was equally true in most other fields of study. Today, however, the students are swamped by an ever-accumulating tsunami of information that is easily accessible but difficult to put in perspective. Information is at our fingertips; but how to apply it remains distant. The ease of reaching information has reduced the value of rote memorization of facts and increased the value of the ability to conceptualize, search, analyse, synthesize and apply knowledge. Learning today and for the future needs to move beyond memorization of facts to conceptual understanding and application in collaborative settings. Therefore, it is essential to build and extend knowledge by connecting to our cerebral storage of knowledge in the brain.
Amongst the plurality of parameters in the present embodiment, a ninth lever may be learning by living. Curiosity based exploration drives experience-dependent learning. This innate force that drives our learning gets squelched if not handled carefully. Therefore, it is valuable to keep it as a lever so as to keep it alive and, if it fades, rekindle it.
According to the data obtained from one or more of the questions answered in the learning environment profiling, the above plurality of parameters are established. Based on the plurality of parameters, the course of learning for the target learners can be optimized. In an embodiment, the course of learning for the target learners is optimized 106 by selecting a course of learning in accordance with the plurality of parameters from a set of predetermined courses of learning.
With reference to step 106, the optimization of a course of learning in accordance with the plurality of the above described parameters is further exemplified as follows. It is understandable to the skilled person in the art that the following questions are for illustration only and are not limiting:
As illustrated in
The following examples illustrate the application of the disclosed method of
Example 1: Target learners are well-educated and well-resourced graduate students in a medical program. In an existing method of teaching graduate students, each student is individually responsible for learning the core concepts and principles prior to coming to class, using learning materials made available to them by the faculty. This learning is reinforced by the Readiness Assurance Process (RAP) which includes Individual Readiness Assessment (IRA), usually given in the form of Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ), and followed by team assessments that is the Group Readiness Assessment (GRA) in which students repeat the same MCQs but answer as a team. The IRA/GRA MCQs are written to the level of difficulty such that the students as individuals obtain approximately 65-75% items correct. When these same problem sets are re-addressed as a team, they typically score 90-95% correct. The IRA process is designed to evaluate the student's understanding and retention of the core concepts and principles, but is not the end of the learning process. The GRA permits the students to learn from each other and as a team identify any gaps or uncertainties, which opens the students' minds for further learning. Both IRA and GRA assessments contribute to each student's individual final grade. After the RAP is completed, the students proceed through open-book/open Internet Application exercises which require critical analysis, problem solving and creativity and are all a part of their grade. The problem sets in this portion are addressed as a team and require the use of core content covered earlier (often directly linked to immediate RAP, but can be from earlier sessions as well). The team score for Applications generally runs between 75-85% correct.
All student teams meet in the same room and the entire class participates in discussions facilitated by a faculty member. Therefore, the learning goes from the individual student, to their team, to the entire classroom. This strategy does not require an individual faculty preceptor for each team. Instead, a faculty facilitator guides the learning for the entire class and may be assisted by several other faculty members, each with different content/subject expertise. They all work together to determine the key learning points and related preparatory content. Then, they co-develop MCQs and applications. Finally, the content experts provide clarity to core principles during class and a final summary of key points.
These sessions are generally delivered on average twice a week. Two hours are devoted to the RAP consisting of an average of 25 MCQs based on the prior preparation. (After a break, two to three hours are devoted to an application exercise which consists of a series of problem statements accompanied by several challenging evaluative questions.
The results of the existing method, as described above, can be improved by applying the method of the present invention as described below.
Based on this learning environment profile, the teachers and, optionally, the school, a plurality of parameters may be established as illustrated below. Then follows the optimization step 106 of the course of learning, which is also illustrated below.
It is understandable to the skilled person that in the above Example that the target learners are medical students who have relatively similar profiles in age, potential for success in medical school (as evidenced by the Medical College Admission Test scores) and education background (having minimum academic background of bachelor's degree). They are extremely highly motivated due to the intense selection process for medical school, and have nearly 100% of available professional time devoted to education for a period of four years. This Example is one context in which the present method may be applied. It is understandable to the skilled person that the present invention may be used for any learner with varying ages, potential for success and previous educational background and any level of learner motivation.
Example 2: Target learners are university level students at a cross-cultural institution.
In Example 2, the dynamic optimizing course of learning is aimed at improving active learning and making the content devised in one cultural context relevant to the students in another cultural context. In this learning environment, students review pre-readings and videos before class and then come to class to take an individual test to see how well they learned the material on their own. After this, students divide into teams and retake the same questions as a group to get immediate feedback on their ideas. After this, the class does a group debrief to identify points that need further study. This is followed by applying to learning the cases that are relevant in their cultural context.
Process:
In a first experiment of Example 2, the target learners comprise 17 fulltime undergraduate students on the Singapore campus of an American university. In this context, the dynamic optimizing course of learning aims at improving active learning and making the content devised in the U.S. cultural context relevant to the students in the Asian cultural context. Accordingly, the objectives of the dynamic optimizing course in this experiment comprise to improve outcomes with active learning techniques to deliver a regionally relevant curriculum in the “Management for Aeronautical Science” module, which is tailored to comprise 70% private pilot ground school classes with 30% aviation business 101 classes for the candidates in Bachelor of Science.
As an interim result of the first experiment of the optimized course of learning, after 9 weeks of the above optimized course, student surveys as illustrated in
In a second experiment of Example 2, target learners comprise 16 undergraduate students, master students and recent graduates from a region where English is not the first language, e.g. China. The objective of this experiment is to increase the target learner's knowledge and confidence in five core career skills, which include career strategy, pitching, networking, resume writing and interviewing. In this context, the optimized course of learning is designed to include pre-readings having 35 pre-recorded voice annotated lectures (all less than 10 minutes) distributed before a five-day boot camp style face-to-face session taught with team-based learning and simulations.
The objective was to improve the educational delivery at a number of primary and secondary schools in resource deficient environment. Following site visits to several individual schools, learning program pilot focused on English as a second language instruction for first and second grade primary school children.
Process
Example 4: The target learners are corporate employees, e.g. commercial and medical leaders and managers. In an experiment of Example 4, a pharmaceutical company wants to improve the skills of its employees. Its employees had different backgrounds and levels of expertise. In the experiment, the target learners comprise 60 employees of the pharmaceutical company recruited from 10 Asian countries. The company wants its employees to learn about certain respiratory diseases and the company's products to treat those diseases. In the experiment, the objective is to increase the target learners' knowledge and confidence in this disease area. Learners completed pre-work (e.g. pre-readings) on their own, followed by a three day face-to-face session. The face-to-face session comprised a 1.5 day sales simulation session and a 1.5 day team-based learning.
Process
In view of the above, a summary of levers applied in various learning environments may be illustrated as follows:
In the system 500, a plurality of parameters are established for optimizing a cerebral course of learning for the target learners 502 in response to the one or more sets of data. In the present embodiment, nine sets of parameters 508, 509, 510, 511, 512, 513, 514, 515 and 516 as described above are established. For the simplicity of understanding, only 508 and 516 are expressly shown in
In the system 500, the course of learning is optimized 518 in accordance with the plurality of parameters 508 to 516. The optimized course of learning is then presented 520 to one or more of the target learners 502. This present embodiment of the optimized course of learning may involve inputs from one or more teachers 506.
In the system 500, the cerebral learning of the one or more target learners 502 of the optimized course of learning is then measured 524 to arrive at an effectiveness feedback (EFK) 522 of the plurality of parameters 508 to 516.
If the EFK 522 falls below a predetermined threshold, one or more of the plurality of parameters will be refined 526 to dynamically optimize the course of learning.
It should be appreciated that the exemplary embodiments are only examples, and are not intended to limit the scope, applicability, operation, or configuration of the invention in any way. Rather, the foregoing detailed description will provide those skilled in the art with a convenient road map for implementing an exemplary embodiment of the invention, it being understood that various changes may be made in the function and arrangement of elements and method of operation described in an exemplary embodiment without departing from the scope of the invention as set forth in the appended claims.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10201505840U | Jul 2015 | SG | national |
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/SG2016/050353 | 7/27/2016 | WO | 00 |
