| Literature DB >> 34421330 |
Sadia Ali1, Yaser Hafeez1, Muhammad Azeem Abbas1, Muhammad Aqib1, Asif Nawaz1.
Abstract
The education system worldwide has been affected by the Corona Virus Diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, resulting in the interruption of all educational institutions. Moreover, as a precautionary measure, the lockdown has been imposed that has severely affected the learning processes, especially assessment activities, including exams and viva. In such challenging situations, E-learning platforms could play a vital role in conducting seamless academic activities. In spite of all the advantages of remote learning systems, many hurdles and obstacles, like a selection of suitable learning resources/material encounter by individual users based on their interests or requirements. Especially those who are not well familiar with the internet technology in developing countries and are in need of a platform that could help them in resolving the issues related to the online virtual environment. Therefore, in this work, we have proposed a mechanism that intelligently and correctly predicts the appropriate preferences for the selection of resources relevant to a specific user by considering the capabilities of diverse perspectives users to provide quality online education and to make work from home policy more effective and progressive during the pandemic. The proposed system helps teachers in providing quality online education, familiarizing them with advanced technology in the online environment. It also semantically predicts the preferences for virtual assistance of those users who are in need of learning the new tools and technologies in short time as per their institutional requirements in order to meet the quality standards of online education. The experimental and statistical results have demonstrated that the proposed virtual personalized preferences system has improved overall academic activities as compared to the current method. The proposed system enhanced user's learning abilities and facilitated them in selecting short courses while using different online education tools adopted/suggested by the institutions to conduct online classes/seminars/webinars etc., as compared to the conventional classes/activities.Entities:
Keywords: Architectures for educational technology system; Augmented and virtual reality; COVID-19; Distance education; Recommendation system; Teaching/learning strategies; Text mining
Year: 2021 PMID: 34421330 PMCID: PMC8367651 DOI: 10.1007/s11042-021-11414-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Multimed Tools Appl ISSN: 1380-7501 Impact factor: 2.757
Fig. 1Proposed System
Fig. 2Student Interface
Fig. 3Personalized Preferences Prediction Interface


Fig. 4Steps for Text Mining
Scenario for Text mining
| Scenario | Point of views | |
|---|---|---|
| Learner View | Application View | |
Online education platform functionalities description are; "The user login/signup to a management system. The user creates their profiles and submits. Then system displays the home page with a user-ID and a list of recommended courses. Students select from the list with the highest ranking. " | Create/open user profile | Show home-page |
| Student chose course/s | Assign User-ID | |
| Submit selection | Courses Recommended List | |
Priority of Preferences
| Preferences | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CP | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 5 |
| PP | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
| NP | 8 | 9 | 4 | 12 | 5 |
CP currently prioritized, PP previously prioritized, NP new priority and, P Preferences
Demographic information
| Experience | CT Ps | ET Ps | |
|---|---|---|---|
| < & = 2 Y* | Oc ** | 10 | 9 |
| Ol*** | 15 | 14 | |
| < & = 3 Y | Oc | 6 | 7 |
| Ol | 10 | 12 | |
| < & = 4 Y | Oc | 5 | 6 |
| Ol | 3 | 2 | |
| < & = 5 Y | Oc | 6 | 6 |
| Ol | 1 | 1 | |
| < & = 6 Y | Oc | 3 | 2 |
| Ol | 1 | 1 | |
CT Ps Control Treatment preferences, ET Ps Experimental treatment preferences
* Y Years; **Oc On-Campus; ***Ol Online
Fig. 5Experiment Procedure
List of Factors
| S. # | Factors |
|---|---|
| i | Easily Understandable (EU) |
| ii | Less Complicated (LC) |
| iii | Student/learner Performance level (SP) |
| iv | Increase/Boost Motivation (IM) |
| v | Reduce team Efforts (RE) |
| vi | Learning ability (Le) |
| vii | Cooperation online (Co) |
| viii | Social relations Enhancement (SE) |
| ix | Personalized selection (Pe) |
| x | User Satisfaction (US) |
| xi | Semantically analysed Info (SI) |
| xii | Virtually aided Environment (VE) |
| xiii | Use Valuable Preferences (UP) |
| xiv | Accurate and correct Referred preferences (AR) |
Statistical test
| Groups | Ps | Pre-Test | Post-Test | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| U | S.D | U | S.D | ||
| Control Treatment | 30 | 28.1 | 9.18 | 36.5 | 9.55 |
| Experimental Treatment | 30 | 37.6 | 10.1 | 60.1 | 12.05 |
Ps Preferences, U Mean, SD Standard Deviation
Cronbach's statistical alpha test
| Groups | Preferences | Pre-Test | Post-Test | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| t-value | Significance-value | t-value | significance-value | |||
| Control Treatment | 30 | 2.75 | 0.001 | 2.989 | 0.000 | |
| Experimental Treatment | 30 | 3.047 | 0.000 | 3.867 | 0.000 | |
Statistic Analysis
| G | SS | Degree of freedom | Mean Square | F | Significance difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Between Control and Experiment Treatments | 1978.733 | 14 | 141.338 | 3.750 | 0.001 |
| Within Control and Experiments Treatments | 2018.467 | 15 | 134.564 | ||
| Total Value | 3997.200 | 29 |
G Groups, SS MeanSum of squares
Fig. 6EM Participants Results
Fig. 7PS Participants Satisfaction Level
Fig. 8Parameters Analysis of Strongly Agreed
Fig. 9Parameters Analysis of Agreed
Fig. 10Parameters Analysis of Neutral
Fig. 11Parameters Analysis of Disagreed
Fig. 12Parameters Analysis of Strongly Disagreed
Fig. 13Novelty effect
Fig. 14Comparison of PS and EM