Supplement to the Article: The Role of Application Domain Knowledge in Using OWL DL Diagrams: A Study of Inference and Problem-Solving Tasks

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joerg Leukel ◽  
Vijayan Sugumaran ◽  
Marvin Hubl
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Domain Knowledge ◽  
Application Domain

Development and Usage of TAPS Packages in the Mechanical Engineering Course

2010 ◽  
pp. 91-119
Author(s):  
Manjit Singh Sidhu
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Interface Design ◽  
Domain Knowledge ◽  
Mechanical Engineering ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Computer Software ◽  
Learning Approaches ◽  
Situational Learning

The Mechanical Engineering course is largely based on practical skills and requires the acquisition of basic skills and domain knowledge before applying them on real problems. In order to design and develop a technology assisted problem solving (TAPS) package particularly to guide students in learning and solving engineering problems, it is necessary to be acquainted with its development and its process of realization in practical terms in computer software. User interface design has been applied in learning environments as discussed in previous Chapter 3. Therefore it is informative to discover the extent to which they help engineering students in their learning and thereby be incorporated in TAPS packages. This examination includes an overview of good practice in the positioning and operation of navigational features, visual screen presentation, the nature of presentation, help and feedback and views on the role of the learner in using the TAPS packages. This Chapter discusses the need to learn practical Mechanical Engineering skills and reviews the tutorial and situational learning approaches. Additionally the Chapter provides an overview of TAPS packages and the approach adopted for problem solving and student learning.

Improving the questions we ask, with Psychology and Cognitive Conflict.

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett Buttliere
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
Meaning Making ◽  
Cognitive Conflict ◽  
Empirical Literature ◽  
Present Evidence ◽  
Scientific Papers ◽  
Science In Society

Over the last decade, there have been many suggestions to improve how scientists answer their questions, but far fewer attempt to improve the questions scientists are asking in the first place. The goal of the paper is then to examine and summarize synthesize the evidence on how to ask the best questions possible. First is a brief review of the philosophical and empirical literature on how the best science is done, which implicitly but not explicitly mentions the role of psychology and especially cognitive conflict. Then we more closely focus on the psychology of the scientist, finding that they are humans, engaged in a meaning making process, and that cognitive conflict is a necessary input for any learning or change in the system. The scientific method is, of course, a specialized meaning making process. We present evidence for this central role of cognitive conflict in science by examining the most discussed scientific papers between 2013 and 2017, which are, in general, controversial and about big problems (e.g., whether vaccines cause autism, how often doctors kill us with their mistakes). Toward the end we discuss the role of science in society, suggesting science itself is an uncertainty reducing and problem solving enterprise. From this basis we encourage scientists to take riskier stances on bigger topics, for the good of themselves and society generally.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document