Download - Academy Publisher
Download - Academy Publisher
Download - Academy Publisher
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
elated weighted vector with ∑<br />
n<br />
i=<br />
1<br />
ω = 1<br />
weighted average operator of linguistic 2-tuples<br />
ξ ω<br />
= ∇(<br />
(( s , α ),( s<br />
1<br />
n<br />
∑<br />
i=<br />
1<br />
1<br />
∇<br />
−1<br />
2<br />
, α ), L,(<br />
s<br />
2<br />
( s , α ) ω )<br />
i<br />
C. WEIGHT OF EVALUATION INDICATORS<br />
i<br />
i<br />
n<br />
i<br />
, α )) = (ˆ, s ˆ) α<br />
n<br />
, then the<br />
ω<br />
ξ is[15]<br />
(6)<br />
The questionnaires were analyzed using linguistic 2-<br />
tuple representation model. And the weight of each<br />
indicator was obtained. The weight of each sub-indicator<br />
was also analyzed. Thus, evaluation system for blended<br />
learning and its weights of each indicator and its subindicator<br />
could be demonstrated as table 1.<br />
indicators<br />
(weight)<br />
Quality of<br />
BB<br />
resource<br />
(0.35)<br />
Mutual<br />
exchange<br />
quality of<br />
BB<br />
(0.37)<br />
Quality of<br />
blended<br />
discussion<br />
(0.28)<br />
Table 1 evaluation system and its weight<br />
Sub-indicators (weight)<br />
Abundance of resources in BB (0.37)<br />
Relativity of resource provided in BB (0.34)<br />
Distribution reasonability of resources in<br />
BB (0.29)<br />
Punctuality of teacher’s answer(0.33)<br />
Accuracy of teacher’s answer(0.38)<br />
Energetic discussion inspired by<br />
teachers(0.29)<br />
The abundance of the materials and its<br />
relationship to the topic(0.22)<br />
The logic of the team representation report<br />
(0.20)<br />
Frequency of the team discussion(0.14)<br />
The accuracy and depth of the problem<br />
solving.(0.19)<br />
Question posted and frequency of answers<br />
(0.09)<br />
Attitude of the group team(0.16)<br />
Ⅴ. CONCLUSION<br />
The paper introduced the architecture of blended<br />
learning system. It got the indicators to evaluation the<br />
blended learning. Then it used linguistic 2-tuple<br />
representation model to handle fuzzy term in<br />
questionnaire and obtained the weight of each indicators<br />
and its sub-indictors. The education management<br />
department can use the evaluation system proposed in the<br />
paper to assess the network resource in BB.<br />
ACKNOWLEDGMENT<br />
This work is supported by Education Planning<br />
Research foundation of Zhejiang Province Grant by<br />
scg85. It is also supported by Jiaxing University<br />
Education Research Foundation Grant by 85150932 and<br />
Economic Commence Market Application Technology<br />
Foundation Grant by 2007gdecof004.<br />
REFERENCES<br />
[1] Prahalad. Case study: University of Michigan Business<br />
School Using PRAJA. Technology to Enhance<br />
Learning,2002.<br />
[2] K.K.He, “E-Learning and the revolution of<br />
university/college“ ,http://www.edu.Cn /<br />
20011225/3015160. shtml”, 05-10-2009<br />
[3] K.D. Li, J.H.Zhao, “Theory and its application of blended<br />
learning”, Electrical education research, Vol.4, pp.78-81,<br />
July 2004<br />
[4] M.Driscoll·, “Blended learning : Let’s get beyond the<br />
hype”, Learning and Training Innovations[R],2002.<br />
[5] H.Singh, C.Reed, “Achieving Success with Blended<br />
Learning”, http://www.centra.com/downloa whitepapers/<br />
blended learning. Pdf, 30-01-2002.<br />
[6] D.Clark(2003), “Whitepaper: Blended Learning”,<br />
http://www.epic.co.uk/content/resources/white_papers/blen<br />
ded. Htm, 21-05-2005<br />
[7] W.L.Chen andC.K.Looi, “Incorporating online discussion<br />
in face to face classroom learning: A new blended learning<br />
approach”, Australasian Journal of Educational<br />
Technology, Vol.23, pp. 307-326, March 2007:.<br />
[8] N.H.Yuan, “Blended instructional schema based on virtual<br />
technology”, Journal of Guangdong technology normal<br />
college,Vol.5, pp. 135-137, May 2006<br />
[9] W.S. Pan, “Research on blended instructionalschema based<br />
on network resource”, Electrical education research, Vol. 8,<br />
pp. 49-51, August 2006.8<br />
[10] X.Li, “Exploring effective learning schema based on<br />
blended learning and self-studying”, Modern education<br />
techniques, Vol.4, pp.32-35, April 2007<br />
[11] Y.P.Jiang, Y.N.Xing,“Consistency Analysis of Two-Tuple<br />
Linguistic Judgement Matrix,” Journal of Northeastern<br />
University(Natural Science), Vol.28, pp.129-132, January<br />
2007<br />
[12] Z.S.Xu, ” A Multi-attribute group decision making method<br />
based on fuzzy linguistic evaluationa and GIOWA<br />
operator”, J.Sys.Sci.& Math. Sci., Vol.24, pp.:218-224,<br />
April 2004 (in Chinese).<br />
[13] F. Herrera, L.Martinez. A model based on linguistic 2-<br />
tuples for dealing with multigranular hierarchical linguistic<br />
contexts in multi-expert decision making. IEEE<br />
Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics-part b:<br />
Cybernetics, Vol.31, pp. 227-234, April 2001<br />
[14] F.Herrera , L.Martinez, “The 2-tuple linguistic<br />
computational model—advantages of its linguistic<br />
description, accuracy and consistency”, International<br />
Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based<br />
Systems, Vol.9, pp. 33-48, September 2003<br />
[15] X.W.Liao, H.Li,G.M.Dong., “A Multi-attribute Group<br />
Decision-making Approach Dealing with Linguistic<br />
Assessment Information,” Theory and Practice of System<br />
Engineering, Vol.9, pp.90-98, September 2006 (in Chinese)<br />
84