Rakesh Agrawal
Krishnaram Kenthapadi
ABSTRACT
Good textbooks are organized in a systematically progressive fashion so that students acquire new knowledge and learn new concepts based on known items of information. We provide a diagnostic tool for quantitatively assessing the comprehension burden that a textbook imposes on the reader due to non-sequential presentation of concepts. We present a formal definition of comprehension burden and propose an algorithmic approach for computing it. We apply the tool to a corpus of high school textbooks from India and empirically examine its effectiveness in helping authors identify sections of textbooks that can benefit from reorganizing the material presented.
- R. Agrawal, S. Chakraborty, S. Gollapudi, A. Kannan, and K. Kenthapadi. Quality of textbooks: An empirical study. In ACM DEV, 2012. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- R. Agrawal, S. Gollapudi, A. Kannan, and K. Kenthapadi. Identifying enrichment candidates in textbooks. In WWW, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Agrawal, S. Gollapudi, K. Kenthapadi, N. Srivastava, and R. Velu. Enriching textbooks through data mining. In ACM DEV, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. B. Armbruster and T. H. Anderson. Content area textbooks. Technical report, Reading Education Report No. 23, BBN, 1981.Google Scholar
- B. B. Armbruster and T. H. Anderson. Producing considerate expository text: Or easy reading is damned hard writing. Technical report, Reading Education Report No. 46, BBN, 1984.Google Scholar
- B. K. Britton, A. Woodward, and M. R. Binkley. Learning from Textbooks: Theory and Practice. Routledge, 1993.Google Scholar
- B. Bruce, A. Rubin, and K. Starr. Why readability formulas fail. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, PC-24, 1981.Google Scholar
- M. Chambliss and R. Calfee. Textbooks for Learning: Nurturing Children's Minds. Wiley-Blackwell, 1998.Google Scholar
- R. Clark, F. Nguyen, and J. Sweller. Efficiency in learning: Evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. Pfeiffer, 2006.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. Collins-Thompson and J. P. Callan. A language modeling approach to predicting reading difficulty. In HLT-NAACL, 2004.Google Scholar
- E. K. Dishner. Reading in the Content Areas: Improving Classroom Instruction. Kendall/Hunt, 1992.Google Scholar
- W. DuBay. The principles of readability. Impact Information, 2004.Google Scholar
- C. Fellbaum. WordNet: An electronic lexical database. MIT Press, 1998.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Gillies and J. Quijada. Opportunity to learn: A high impact strategy for improving educational outcomes in developing countries. USAID Educational Quality Improvement Program (EQUIP2), 2008.Google Scholar
- S. R. Goldman. Learning from text: Reflections on the past and suggestions for the future. Discourse Processes, 23, 1997.Google Scholar
- W. Gray and B. Leary. What makes a book readable. University of Chicago Press, 1935.Google Scholar
- B. Grosz and C. Sidner. Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational linguistics, 12(3), 1986. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Guillemette. Predicting readability of data processing written materials. ACM SIGMIS Database, 18(4), 1987. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. A. Hanushek and L. Woessmann. The role of education quality for economic growth. Policy Research Department Working Paper 4122, World Bank, 2007.Google Scholar
- E. B. Johnsen. Textbooks in the Kaleidoscope: A Critical Survey of Literature and Research on Educational Texts. Scandinavian University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
- J. S. Justeson and S. M. Katz. Technical terminology: Some linguistic properties and an algorithm for indentification in text. Natural Language Engineering, 1(1), 1995.Google Scholar
- R. Kate, X. Luo, S. Patwardhan, M. Franz, R. Florian, R. Mooney, S. Roukos, and C. Welty. Learning to predict readability using diverse linguistic features. In COLING, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Kieras and C. Dechert. Rules for comprehensible technical prose: A survey of the psycholinguistic literature. Technical Report TR-85/ONR-21, University of Michigan, 1985.Google Scholar
- B. Lively and S. Pressey. A method for measuring the vocabulary burden of textbooks. Educational Administration and Supervision, 9(73), 1923.Google Scholar
- D. Marcu. The theory and practice of discourse parsing and summarization. MIT Press, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. Paas, A. Renkl, and J. Sweller. Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 2003.Google Scholar
- J. M. Pawlowski, K. C. Barker, and T. Okamoto. Quality research for learning, education, and training. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 10(2), 2007.Google Scholar
- J. Plass, R. Moreno, and R. Brünken. Cognitive load theory. Cambridge University Press, 2010.Google Scholar
- L. Polanyi and R. Scha. A syntactic approach to discourse semantics. In COLING, 1984. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Pollock, P. Chandler, and J. Sweller. Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12(1), 2002.Google Scholar
- R. Seguin. The elaboration of school textbooks. Technical report, ED-90/WS-24, UNESCO, 1989.Google Scholar
- L. Sherman. Analytics of literature: A manual for the objective study of English prose and poetry. Ginn and Company, 1893.Google Scholar
- S. A. Thompson and W. C. Mann. Rhetorical structure theory: A framework for the analysis of texts. IPRA Papers in Pragmatics, 1(1), 1987.Google Scholar
- K. Toutanova, D. Klein, C. D. Manning, and Y. Singer. Feature-rich part-of-speech tagging with a cyclic dependency network. In NAACL-HLT, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Tyson-Bernstein. A conspiracy of good intentions: America's textbook fiasco. Technical report, Council for Basic Education, Washington, 1989.Google Scholar
- A. Verspoor and K. B. Wu. Textbooks and educational development. Technical report, World Bank, 1990.Google Scholar
- K. Wang, C. Thrasher, E. Viegas, X. Li, and P. Hsu. An overview of Microsoft Web N-gram corpus and applications. In NAACL-HLT, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. N. Whitehead. The organisation of thought. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 17, 1916--17.Google Scholar
- S. Witte and L. Faigley. Coherence, cohesion, and writing quality. College Composition and Communication, 32(2), 1981.Google Scholar
- A. Woodward, D. L. Elliott, and C. Nagel. Textbooks in School and Society: An Annotated Bibliography and Guide to Research. Garland, 1988.Google Scholar
- World-Bank. Knowledge for Development: World Development Report: 1998/99. Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
- J. Zhao and M. Kan. Domain-specific iterative readability computation. In ACM JCDL, 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Empowering authors to diagnose comprehension burden in textbooks
Recommendations
Studying from electronic textbooks
CIKM '13: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on Information & Knowledge ManagementWe present study navigator, an algorithmically-generated aid for enhancing the experience of studying from electronic textbooks. The study navigator for a section of the book consists of helpful concept references for understanding this section. Each ...
Quality of textbooks: an empirical study
ACM DEV '12: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Symposium on Computing for DevelopmentTextbooks are the educational input most consistently associated with gains in student learning. Particularly in developing countries, textbooks are the primary conduits for delivering content knowledge to the students and the teachers base their lesson ...
Enriching textbooks with images
CIKM '11: Proceedings of the 20th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge managementTextbooks have a direct bearing on the quality of education imparted to the students. Therefore, it is of paramount importance that the educational content of textbooks should provide rich learning experience to the students. Recent studies on ...
Comments