Automatic Classification of Semantic Content of Classroom Dialogue

Abstract

Due to benefits for teaching and learning, an increasing number of studies have focused on classroom dialogue and how to make it productive. Coding, in which the transcribed conversation is allocated to a set of features, is commonly employed to deal with the textual data arising from this dialogue. This is generally done manually and cannot provide timely feedback to the participants. To address this issue, we explored the possibility of automatically classifying the semantic content of classroom dialogue. Seven categories (prior-known knowledge, analysis, coordination, speculation, uptake, agreement and querying) were distinguished automatically using an artificial neural network-based model. The model achieved acceptable performance and was comparable to human coding. Information about quality of dialogue can be identified in a timely manner. With this knowledge, classroom dialogue can be managed more skilfully, and a more productive form of dialogue is likely to be achieved by teachers and students.

A Systematic Review of Machine Learning for Assessment and Feedback of Treatment Fidelity

“…In this context, the machine learning methods were designed to automatically assign codes from the behavioural coding measures to overt interactions recorded in the dataset (e.g., words/utteran- (Atkins et al, 2014;Can et al, 2015;Can et al, 2012;Can et al, 2016;Cao et al, 2020;Carcone et al, 2019, Study 1;Chakravarthula et al, 2015;Chen et al, 2019;Gibson et al, 2017;Gibson et al, 2016;Gupta et al, 2014;Hasan et al, 2019;Hasan et al, 2018;Imel et al, 2015;Perez-Rosas et al, 2017;Perez-Rosas et al, 2019;Singla et al, 2018;Tanana et al, 2016;Xiao et al, 2012;Xiao et al, 2015;Xiao, Can, et al, 2016;Xiao, Huang, et al, 2016) Medical care, provider-patient clinical interactions (Carcone et al, 2019, Study 2;Park et al, 2019) Education (teachers) (Blanchard et al, 2016a;Blanchard et al, 2016b;Donelly et al, 2017;Donnely et al, 2016a;Donnelly et al, 2016b;Samei et al, 2014;Samei et al, 2015;Song et al, 2020;Suresh et al, 2019;Wang et al, 2014) Counselling, (counsellors), (Althoff et al, 2016;Flemotomos et al, 2018;Gallo et al, 2015;Gaut et al, 2017;Goldberg et al, 2020…”

Computationally Identifying Funneling and Focusing Questions in Classroom Discourse

“…Prior work in computationally analyzing classroom discourse has employed a variety of techniques to automatically detect teacher discourse variables. Recent advances in natural language processing has led to a larger presence of work applying neural methods with varying levels of success in detecting classroom discourse variables, such as semantic content, instructional talk, and elaborated evaluation (Jensen et al, 2021;Song et al, 2021). For unsupervised approaches, Demszky et al (2021a), which is also most similar to our work in terms of approach and dataset, propose an unsupervised measure of teachers' uptake of students' contributions, and we use their sample in our annotation for funneling and focusing.…”

Establishing a School Counseling Community in Collaboration with the Family, School, and Community: A Qualitative Analysis in Ten Primary and Secondary Schools in G Province Using NVivo

“…Current And Future Information and Communication Technology (ICT) based on the Internet and (big) data [19] has effectively promoted and improved the development and effectiveness of school counseling. Machine learning, artificial intelligence [20] , and functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) technology (revealing human brain activity and function) contribute to the development of cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging. [21] It will also further assist school counseling, and it has had a certain degree of good landing, and it should pay attention to its promoting role.…”