Journal of University of Chinese Academy of Sciences >
Knowledge structure evolution and evaluation method in computer science
Received date: 2015-12-22
Online published: 2016-11-15
When educators and learners choose wide thick or sophisticated knowledge system, they face judgment problem:teaching core concepts in synchronization with the times and understanding the subject of global knowledge map. This work collects the curriculum outline guides of ACM/IEEE from 1991 to 2014. We start from the smallest component of knowledge unit, and we analyze now the core area and the concept change after the concept of computer science in the past 60 years has been increased from 591 to 5 824. The analysis in this work shows that the growth rate of the subject concept slowed down from 354% to 1.41% in 2013 and 2014; knowledge areas expanded from 9 to 19; and knowledge units expanded from 10 to 18. The main contributions of this work are as follows. We collect the data and establish the dataset. This is the first time to use the knowledge framework of curricula, and in three aspects we reveal the evolution law of computer science; and then we have set up an online platform.
Key words： knowledge unit; curricular volume; concept extraction platform
ZHANG Libo , ZHANG Fei , LUO Tiejian . Knowledge structure evolution and evaluation method in computer science[J]. Journal of University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2016 , 33(6) : 844 -850 . DOI: 10.7523/j.issn.2095-6134.2016.06.017
[1] Kay J, Reimann P, Diebold E, et al. MOOCs:so many learners, so much potential[J]. Intelligent Systems, 2013, 28(3):70-77.
[2] Bednjanec A, Tretinjak M F, Tretinjak M. Computers and internet in active learning[C]//Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), 201538th International Convention on. IEEE, 2015:836-838.
[3] Guo P J, Kim J, Rubin R. How video production affects student engagement:an empirical study of mooc videos[C]//Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference. ACM, 2014:41-50.
[4] Boyack K W, Börner K, Klavans R. Mapping the structure and evolution of chemistry research[J]. Scientometrics, 2009, 79(1):45-60
[5] Hoonlor A, Szymanski B K, Zaki M J. Trends in computer science research[J]. Communications of the ACM, 2013, 56(10):74-83.
[6] Hung J. Trends of e-learning research from 2000 to 2008:use of text mining and bibliometrics[J]. British Journal of Educational Technology, 2012, 43(1):5-16.
[7] Li J, Wang M H, Ho Y S. Trends in research on global climate change:a science citation index expanded-based analysis[J]. Global and Planetary Change, 2011, 77(1):13-20.
[8] Bogoiavlenski I A, Clear A G, Davies G, et al. Historical perspectives on the computing curriculum[J]. ACM SIGCUE Outlook, 1997, 25(4):94-111.
[9] Shackelford R, McGettrick A, Sloan R, et al. Computing curricula 2005:the overview report[J]. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 2006, 38(1):456-457.
[10] Marshall L. A comparison of the core aspects of the ACM/IEEE computer science curriculum 2013 strawman report with the specified core of CC2001 and CS2008 review[C]//Proceedings of Second Computer Science Education Research Conference, ACM, 2012:29-34.
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |