Kangyu Yuan
ABSTRACT
Learning to read scientific papers critically, which requires first grasping their main ideas and then raising critical thoughts, is important yet challenging for novice researchers. The traditional ways to develop critical paper reading (CPR) skills, e.g., checking general tutorials or taking reading courses, often can not provide individuals with adaptive and accessible support. In this paper, we first derive user requirements of a CPR training tool based on literature and a survey study (N=52). Then, we develop CriTrainer , an interactive tool for CPR training. It leverages text summarization techniques to train readers’ skills in grasping the paper’s main ideas. It further utilizes template-based generated questions to help them learn how to raise critical thoughts. A mixed-design study (N=24) shows that compared to a baseline tool with general CPR guidance, students trained by CriTrainer perform better in independently raising critical thinking questions on a new paper. We conclude with design considerations for CPR training tools.
Supplemental Material
Available for Download
zip
3606816.zip (61.5 MB)
Supplemental File
- Sigchi A.2023. Late breaking work - CHI 2021. Retrieved in March 2023 from https://chi2023.acm.org/for-authors/late-breaking-work/. (2023).Google Scholar
- Philip C Abrami, Robert M Bernard, Evgueni Borokhovski, Anne Wade, Michael A Surkes, Rana Tamim, and Dai Zhang. 2008. Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of educational research 78, 4 (2008), 1102–1134.Google Scholar
- Laith Abualigah, Mohammad Qassem Bashabsheh, Hamzeh Alabool, and Mohammad Shehab. 2020. Text summarization: a brief review. Recent Advances in NLP: the case of Arabic language (2020), 1–15.Google Scholar
- Mehdi Allahyari, Seyedamin Pouriyeh, Mehdi Assefi, Saeid Safaei, Elizabeth D Trippe, Juan B Gutierrez, and Krys Kochut. 2017. Text summarization techniques: a brief survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.02268 (2017).Google Scholar
- Ayham Alomari, Norisma Idris, Aznul Qalid Md Sabri, and Izzat Alsmadi. 2022. Deep reinforcement and transfer learning for abstractive text summarization: A review. Computer Speech & Language 71 (2022), 101276.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tal August, Lucy Lu Wang, Jonathan Bragg, Marti A Hearst, Andrew Head, and Kyle Lo. 2022. Paper plain: Making medical research papers approachable to healthcare consumers with natural language processing. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (2022).Google Scholar
- Yejin Bang, Samuel Cahyawijaya, Nayeon Lee, Wenliang Dai, Dan Su, Bryan Wilie, Holy Lovenia, Ziwei Ji, Tiezheng Yu, Willy Chung, 2023. A multitask, multilingual, multimodal evaluation of chatgpt on reasoning, hallucination, and interactivity. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.04023 (2023).Google Scholar
- Sheri Berkeley and Paul J Riccomini. 2013. QRAC-the-code: A comprehension monitoring strategy for middle school social studies textbooks. Journal of Learning Disabilities 46, 2 (2013), 154–165.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Marilyn Binkley, Ola Erstad, Joan Herman, Senta Raizen, Martin Ripley, May Miller-Ricci, and Mike Rumble. 2012. Defining twenty-first century skills. In Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. Springer, 17–66.Google Scholar
- Benjamin Samuel Bloom. 1956. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. (1956).Google Scholar
- Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2 (2006), 77–101.Google Scholar
- Sébastien Bubeck, Varun Chandrasekaran, Ronen Eldan, Johannes Gehrke, Eric Horvitz, Ece Kamar, Peter Lee, Yin Tat Lee, Yuanzhi Li, Scott Lundberg, 2023. Sparks of artificial general intelligence: Early experiments with gpt-4. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12712 (2023).Google Scholar
- Jochen WL Cals and Daniel Kotz. 2013. Effective writing and publishing scientific papers, part II: title and abstract. Journal of clinical epidemiology 66, 6 (2013), 585.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ricardo Campos, Vítor Mangaravite, Arian Pasquali, Alípio Jorge, Célia Nunes, and Adam Jatowt. 2020. YAKE! Keyword extraction from single documents using multiple local features. Information Sciences 509 (2020), 257–289.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Roland Case. 2005. Moving critical thinking to the main stage. Education Canada 45, 2 (2005), 45–49.Google Scholar
- Eshwar Chandrasekharan, Umashanthi Pavalanathan, Anirudh Srinivasan, Adam Glynn, Jacob Eisenstein, and Eric Gilbert. 2017. You can’t stay here: The efficacy of reddit’s 2015 ban examined through hate speech. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 1, CSCW (2017), 1–22.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Guanliang Chen, Jie Yang, Claudia Hauff, and Geert-Jan Houben. 2018. LearningQ: a large-scale dataset for educational question generation. In Twelfth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lijia Chen, Pingping Chen, and Zhijian Lin. 2020. Artificial intelligence in education: A review. Ieee Access 8 (2020), 75264–75278.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Xiang’Anthony’ Chen, Chien-Sheng Wu, Tong Niu, Wenhao Liu, and Caiming Xiong. 2022. Marvista: A Human-AI Collaborative Reading Tool. arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.08401 (2022).Google Scholar
- Sumit Chopra, Michael Auli, and Alexander M Rush. 2016. Abstractive sentence summarization with attentive recurrent neural networks. In Proceedings of the 2016 conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: human language technologies. 93–98.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Arman Cohan, Iz Beltagy, Daniel King, Bhavana Dalvi, and Daniel S Weld. 2019. Pretrained language models for sequential sentence classification. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.04054 (2019).Google Scholar
- Trevor Anthony Cohn and Mirella Lapata. 2009. Sentence compression as tree transduction. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 34 (2009), 637–674.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lacey Colligan, Henry WW Potts, Chelsea T Finn, and Robert A Sinkin. 2015. Cognitive workload changes for nurses transitioning from a legacy system with paper documentation to a commercial electronic health record. International journal of medical informatics 84, 7 (2015), 469–476.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 1990. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience.Google Scholar
- Sandra Egege and Salah Kutieleh. 2004. Critical Thinking: Teaching Foreign Notions to Foreign Students.International Education Journal 4, 4 (2004), 75–85.Google Scholar
- Asmaa Elsaid, Ammar Mohammed, Lamiaa Fattouh, and Mohamed Sakre. 2022. A Comprehensive Review of Arabic Text summarization. IEEE Access (2022).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Peter Facione. 1990. Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction (The Delphi Report). (1990).Google Scholar
- Patrick J Finn. 1975. A question writing algorithm: The value of explicitly specified processes in test construction. Journal of reading behavior 7, 4 (1975), 341–367.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rosalie Friend. 2002. Summing it up. The Science Teacher 69, 4 (2002), 40.Google Scholar
- Pierre-Etienne Genest and Guy Lapalme. 2011. Framework for abstractive summarization using text-to-text generation. In Proceedings of the workshop on monolingual text-to-text generation. 64–73.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Arthur C Graesser, Jennifer Wiley, Susan R Goldman, Tenaha O’Reilly, Moongee Jeon, and Bethany McDaniel. 2007. SEEK Web tutor: Fostering a critical stance while exploring the causes of volcanic eruption. Metacognition and Learning 2, 2 (2007), 89–105.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Diane F Halpern. 1998. Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Disposition, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring.American psychologist 53, 4 (1998), 449.Google Scholar
- Mariane Hedegaard. 2012. The zone of proximal development as basis for instruction. In An introduction to Vygotsky. Routledge, 234–258.Google Scholar
- Michael Heilman and Noah A Smith. 2010. Good question! statistical ranking for question generation. In Human Language Technologies: The 2010 Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 609–617.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yuuki Iwasaki, Akihiro Yamashita, Yoko Konno, and Katsushi Matsubayashi. 2019. Japanese abstractive text summarization using BERT. In 2019 International Conference on Technologies and Applications of Artificial Intelligence (TAAI). IEEE, 1–5.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hyeonsu Kang, Joseph Chee Chang, Yongsung Kim, and Aniket Kittur. 2022. Threddy: An Interactive System for Personalized Thread-Based Exploration and Organization of Scientific Literature. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Bend, OR, USA) (UIST ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 94, 15 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3526113.3545660Google ScholarDigital Library
- Srinivasan Keshav. 2007. How to read a paper. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 37, 3 (2007), 83–84.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dae Hyun Kim, Enamul Hoque, Juho Kim, and Maneesh Agrawala. 2018. Facilitating Document Reading by Linking Text and Tables. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Berlin, Germany) (UIST ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1145/3242587.3242617Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tae Soo Kim, DaEun Choi, Yoonseo Choi, and Juho Kim. 2022. Stylette: Styling the Web with Natural Language. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 5, 17 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3501931Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alison King. 1995. Designing the instructional process to enhance critical thinking across the curriculum. Teaching of Psychology 22, 1 (1995), 13–17.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel. 2011. Blur: How to know what’s true in the age of information overload. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.Google Scholar
- Geza Kovacs and Robert C Miller. 2014. Smart subtitles for vocabulary learning. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 853–862.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ghader Kurdi, Jared Leo, Bijan Parsia, Uli Sattler, and Salam Al-Emari. 2020. A systematic review of automatic question generation for educational purposes. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 30 (2020), 121–204.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andrew Kuznetsov, Joseph Chee Chang, Nathan Hahn, Napol Rachatasumrit, Bradley Breneisen, Julina Coupland, and Aniket Kittur. 2022. Fuse: In-Situ Sensemaking Support in the Browser. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Bend, OR, USA) (UIST ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 34, 15 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3526113.3545693Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nguyen-Thinh Le and Niels Pinkwart. 2015. Evaluation of a question generation approach using semantic web for supporting argumentation. Research and practice in technology enhanced learning 10 (2015), 1–19.Google Scholar
- Yuan-Hsuan Lee. 2015. Facilitating critical thinking using the C-QRAC collaboration script: Enhancing science reading literacy in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Computers & Education 88 (2015), 182–191.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Adam D Lelkes, Vinh Q Tran, and Cong Yu. 2021. Quiz-style question generation for news stories. In Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021. 2501–2511.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mike Lewis, Yinhan Liu, Naman Goyal, Marjan Ghazvininejad, Abdelrahman Mohamed, Omer Levy, Ves Stoyanov, and Luke Zettlemoyer. 2019. Bart: Denoising sequence-to-sequence pre-training for natural language generation, translation, and comprehension. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.13461 (2019).Google Scholar
- David Lindberg, Fred Popowich, John Nesbit, and Phil Winne. 2013. Generating natural language questions to support learning on-line. In Proceedings of the 14th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation. 105–114.Google Scholar
- Chengzhong Liu, Zeyu Huang, Dingdong Liu, Shixu Zhou, Zhenhui Peng, and Xiaojuan Ma. 2022. PlanHelper: Supporting Activity Plan Construction with Answer Posts in Community-Based QA Platforms. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 6, CSCW2, Article 454 (nov 2022), 26 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3555555Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ming Liu, Rafael A Calvo, and Vasile Rus. 2012. G-Asks: An intelligent automatic question generation system for academic writing support. Dialogue & Discourse 3, 2 (2012), 101–124.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Yixin Liu, Pengfei Liu, Dragomir Radev, and Graham Neubig. 2022. BRIO: Bringing order to abstractive summarization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.16804 (2022).Google Scholar
- Henry B Mann and Donald R Whitney. 1947. On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. The annals of mathematical statistics (1947), 50–60.Google Scholar
- Derek Miller. 2019. Leveraging BERT for extractive text summarization on lectures. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.04165 (2019).Google Scholar
- Farida Mohsen, Jiayang Wang, and Kamal Al-Sabahi. 2020. A hierarchical self-attentive neural extractive summarizer via reinforcement learning (HSASRL). Applied Intelligence 50, 9 (2020), 2633–2646.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tim Moore. 2013. Critical thinking: Seven definitions in search of a concept. Studies in Higher Education 38, 4 (2013), 506–522.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lidiya Murakhovs’ ka, Chien-Sheng Wu, Tong Niu, Wenhao Liu, and Caiming Xiong. 2021. Mixqg: Neural question generation with mixed answer types. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.08175 (2021).Google Scholar
- Siya Sadashiv Naik and Manisha Naik Gaonkar. 2017. Extractive text summarization by feature-based sentence extraction using rule-based concept. In 2017 2nd IEEE International Conference on Recent Trends in Electronics, Information & Communication Technology (RTEICT). IEEE, 1364–1368.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Benjamin D Nye, Arthur C Graesser, and Xiangen Hu. 2014. AutoTutor and family: A review of 17 years of natural language tutoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 24 (2014), 427–469.Google ScholarCross Ref
- University of Toronto. 2020. Reading critically. Retrieved in February 2023 from https://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/critical-reading.pdf. (2020).Google Scholar
- Heather O’Brien. 2016. Theoretical perspectives on user engagement. Why engagement matters: Cross-disciplinary perspectives of user engagement in digital media (2016), 1–26.Google Scholar
- Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar and Ann L Brown. 1986. Interactive teaching to promote independent learning from text. The reading teacher 39, 8 (1986), 771–777.Google Scholar
- Richard Paul and Linda Elder. 1992. Critical thinking: What, why, and how. New directions for community colleges 77, 2 (1992), 3–24.Google Scholar
- Zhenhui Peng, Qingyu Guo, Ka Wing Tsang, and Xiaojuan Ma. 2020. Exploring the effects of technological writing assistance for support providers in online mental health community. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–15.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zhenhui Peng, Yuzhi Liu, Hanqi Zhou, Zuyu Xu, and Xiaojuan Ma. 2022. CReBot: Exploring interactive question prompts for critical paper reading. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 167 (2022), 102898.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Adam M Persky, Melissa S Medina, and Ashley N Castleberry. 2019. Developing critical thinking skills in pharmacy students. American journal of pharmaceutical education 83, 2 (2019).Google Scholar
- Antoine Ponsard, Francisco Escalona, and Tamara Munzner. 2016. PaperQuest: A visualization tool to support literature review. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2264–2271.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sally A Radmacher and Elizabeth Latosi-Sawin. 1995. Summary writing: A tool to improve student comprehension and writing in psychology. Teaching of Psychology 22, 2 (1995), 113–115.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J Liu. 2020. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. The Journal of Machine Learning Research 21, 1 (2020), 5485–5551.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sherry Ruan, Liwei Jiang, Justin Xu, Bryce Joe-Kun Tham, Zhengneng Qiu, Yeshuang Zhu, Elizabeth L Murnane, Emma Brunskill, and James A Landay. 2019. Quizbot: A dialogue-based adaptive learning system for factual knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Vasile Rus, Zhiqiang Cai, and Art Graesser. 2008. Question generation: Example of a multi-year evaluation campaign. Proc WS on the QGSTEC (2008).Google Scholar
- Vinicius Santos, Anderson Iwazaki, Érica Souza, Katia Felizardo, and Nandamudi Vijaykumar. 2021. CrowdSLR: a tool to support the use of crowdsourcing in systematic literature reviews. In Proceedings of the XXXV Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering. 341–346.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomas Scialom, Benjamin Piwowarski, and Jacopo Staiano. 2019. Self-attention architectures for answer-agnostic neural question generation. In Proceedings of the 57th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 6027–6032.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Peng Shi and Jimmy Lin. 2019. Simple bert models for relation extraction and semantic role labeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.05255 (2019).Google Scholar
- Ibrahim Abu Shihab. 2011. Reading as critical thinking. Asian Social Science 7, 8 (2011), 209.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Harry Shum. 2020. You are how you read. Retrieved in February 2023 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du7qLsToW-o. (2020).Google Scholar
- E Elona Sochor. 1959. The nature of critical reading. Elementary English 36, 1 (1959), 47–58.Google Scholar
- Jennifer Pei-Ling Tan, Simon Yang, Elizabeth Koh, and Christin Jonathan. 2016. Fostering 21st century literacies through a collaborative critical reading and learning analytics environment: user-perceived benefits and problematics. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on learning analytics & knowledge. 430–434.Google Scholar
- Terry Tomasek. 2009. Critical reading: Using reading prompts to promote active engagement with text.International journal of teaching and learning in higher education 21, 1 (2009), 127–132.Google Scholar
- Prasanna Umar, Anna Squicciarini, and Sarah Rajtmajer. 2019. Detection and analysis of self-disclosure in online news commentaries. In The World Wide Web Conference. 3272–3278.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Viswanath Venkatesh and Hillol Bala. 2008. Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision sciences 39, 2 (2008), 273–315.Google Scholar
- Mike Wallace and Alison Wray. 2021. Critical reading and writing for postgraduates. Sage.Google Scholar
- Thiemo Wambsganss, Tobias Kueng, Matthias Soellner, and Jan Marco Leimeister. 2021. ArgueTutor: An adaptive dialog-based learning system for argumentation skills. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–13.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thiemo Wambsganss, Christina Niklaus, Matthias Cetto, Matthias Söllner, Siegfried Handschuh, and Jan Marco Leimeister. 2020. AL: An adaptive learning support system for argumentation skills. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tao Wang and David Redmiles. 2017. Auditory Overview of Web Pages for Screen Reader Users. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Québec City, QC, Canada) (UIST ’17 Adjunct). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 193–195. https://doi.org/10.1145/3131785.3131837Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yun Wang, Dongyu Liu, Huamin Qu, Qiong Luo, and Xiaojuan Ma. 2016. A guided tour of literature review: Facilitating academic paper reading with narrative visualization. In Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Visual Information Communication and Interaction. 17–24.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Adhika Pramita Widyassari, Supriadi Rustad, Guruh Fajar Shidik, Edi Noersasongko, Abdul Syukur, Affandy Affandy, 2020. Review of automatic text summarization techniques & methods. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences (2020).Google Scholar
- Blake Williford, Matthew Runyon, Wayne Li, Julie Linsey, and Tracy Hammond. 2020. Exploring the potential of an intelligent tutoring system for sketching fundamentals. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rainer Winkler, Sebastian Hobert, Antti Salovaara, Matthias Söllner, and Jan Marco Leimeister. 2020. Sara, the lecturer: Improving learning in online education with a scaffolding-based conversational agent. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–14.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Weiran Xu, Chenliang Li, Minghao Lee, and Chi Zhang. 2020. Multi-task learning for abstractive text summarization with key information guide network. EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing 2020, 1 (2020), 1–11.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jinhong Yu. 2015. Analysis of critical reading strategies and its effect on college English reading. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 5, 1 (2015), 134.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Xingdi Yuan, Tong Wang, Caglar Gulcehre, Alessandro Sordoni, Philip Bachman, Sandeep Subramanian, Saizheng Zhang, and Adam Trischler. 2017. Machine comprehension by text-to-text neural question generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1705.02012 (2017).Google Scholar
- Haoyu Zhang, Jianjun Xu, and Ji Wang. 2019. Pretraining-based natural language generation for text summarization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.09243 (2019).Google Scholar
- Jingqing Zhang, Yao Zhao, Mohammad Saleh, and Peter Liu. 2020. Pegasus: Pre-training with extracted gap-sentences for abstractive summarization. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 11328–11339.Google Scholar
- Xinlei Zhang, Takashi Miyaki, and Jun Rekimoto. 2016. WithYou: An Interactive Shadowing Coach with Speech Recognition. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Tokyo, Japan) (UIST ’16 Adjunct). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 61–63. https://doi.org/10.1145/2984751.2985704Google ScholarDigital Library
- Xinlei Zhang, Takashi Miyaki, and Jun Rekimoto. 2020. WithYou: automated adaptive speech tutoring with context-dependent speech recognition. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12.Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- CriTrainer: An Adaptive Training Tool for Critical Paper Reading
Recommendations
A Conceptual Paper on the Impact of Culture on Critical Reading Skills of Engineering Students in Asian Higher Education Context
ICETC '21: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Education Technology and ComputersCritical thinking and critical reading have become critical skills required of university graduates in an increasingly technological and digitally connected world. Asian undergraduates, on the other hand, are frequently claimed for their low levels of ...
CReBot: Exploring interactive question prompts for critical paper reading
AbstractPre-compiled guidelines with a static question list can stimulate critical thinking while reading a scientific paper. However, they could be less engaging than taking live question prompts from others. In this paper, we develop CReBot ...
Highlights- This paper develops a CReBot that interactively prompts critical reading questions.
Fostering Youth’s Critical Thinking Competency About AI through Exhibition
CHI '23: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsToday’s youth lives in a world deeply intertwined with AI, which has become an integral part of everyday life. For this reason, it is important for youth to critically think about and examine AI to become responsible users in the future. Although recent ...
Comments