Tamura Yasuhisa

<p>This paper focused on students' peer assessment and analyzed evaluation behavior using log data from the evaluation process. Peer assessments by students are problematic in terms of reliability and validity. Many previous studies have discussed the reliability and validity of peer assessments using the evaluation scores of peer assessments. In contrast, the evaluation process, that is, who, when, and which items were evaluated, and in what order, has not been studied. The purpose of this research is to answer this research question, "How do students evaluate each other during peer assessments?" To achieve this purpose, we break the research question into three sub-questions: (1) Is it worth focusing on evaluation behaviors? (2) How can we visualize evaluation behaviors? and (3) What are the characteristic evaluation behaviors? First, we investigated similar studies and considered their relationship with our proposal. Consequently, it became clear that in social science, there have been many studies that acquire process data for answering surveys and questionnaires. Therefore, also in peer assessment research, there is a possibility to gain a better understanding of how students participate in peer assessment by focusing on the process log. Second, we developed a web-based form as the peer assessment tool to detect students' evaluation process data. Using this form, we conducted an experiment to acquire evaluation process data from a class in which assessments were made to visualize evaluation behavior. Finally, we extracted and discussed characteristic evaluation behaviors. Consequently, we identif ied characteristic evaluation behaviors such as "evaluated in a short time." We expect these results will lead to a clarif ication of the causes of low reliability and validity in students' peer assessments that have been dif f icult to assess through conventional methods based only on the peer assessment score. Specif ically, the causes are, for example, "the students were not evaluating seriously," "they evaluated seriously but could not evaluate properly because of a lack of evaluation ability," or "there was room for improvement in the form design or lesson conditions."</p>

This paper proposes a three-dimensional motion capture and feedback system of flying disc throwing action learners with use of Kinect device. Rather than conventional 3-D motion capture system, Kinect has advantages of cost merit, easy system development and operation. A novice learner of flying disc is trained to keep arm movement in steady height, to twist the waist, and to stretch the elbow according to the waist angle. The proposing system captures learners’ body movement, checks their skeleton positions in pre-motion / motion / post-motion in several ways, and displays feedback messages to refine their actions.

The authors propose 2 functions of utterance data exchange over different LMS, and similarity judgment between different group discussions. Conventional CSCL activities are processed without exchanging any information with other learner groups, even if they are discussing the same topic. With use of the first proposal, a learner group is able to acquire basic information, related references and various standpoints for the given topic during the discussion or in advance. Even if this function is installed, referred discussion is not necessarily relevant to the ongoing discussion, because judgment with discussion topic and keyword is not similar enough. In order to solve this problem, ontology-based similarity judgment was developed. The effectiveness of these proposals was examined through the experiment.

CSCL discussion support functions are proposed. First, attendants are able to refer ongoing and referred discussions with tree-based visualization. Discussion context of another group is available to accelerate the target discussion. Next, the proposing system analyzes non-specified multi-utterance relationship. This analysis result is reflected into the visualization. Attendants select the utterance role from the 6 options of Proposal, Affirmative Comment, Negative Comment, Question, Justification and Argument. Experiment shows that attendants pay deeper attention on their utterances.

Domain Analysis and Modeling is the process which obtains the domain specific domain model with the terminologies, the problem solving / system analysis / system design strategies, the target system structures, etc. by analyzing, identifying and organizing the properties of a family of target systems and the heuristic and reasonable knowledge for a family of practices of system development in order to improve the software productivity and reusability. The domain model can be used as a prototype model, a reference model, a handbook, etc. in order to develop many instances within identical domain repeatedly This survey shows the meaning of "domain", the purpose and process of DAM, the components, representation styles and types of domain models, the relationships for software engineering technologies from the viewpoints of software reuse, domain engineering, requirements engineering, design activity reverse engineering.