Weighted Social Tagging as a Research Methodology to Determine Systemic Trends in

Engineering Education Research

Xin Chen, Nikitha Sambamurthy, Corey Schimpf, Hanjun Xian, Krishna Madhavan

{chen654, snikitha, cschimpf, hxian, cm}@purdue.edu

1

2

3

4

Motivation

Methodology

Data Analysis and Results

Future Work

1

2

3

4

Motivation

Methodology

Data Analysis and Results

Future Work

Trends & Core Topics of EER

Analyze Literature, e. g. JEE

Motivation

Paper review by a domain expert

Motivation

Wankat (1999)

Motivation

Wankat (2004)

Trends & Core Topics of EER

Analyze Literature, e. g. JEE

Paper review by a domain expert Machine analysis based on word count

Motivation

Motivation

Kim, Ko, Elmqvist, & Ebert (2011)

Viégas, Wattenberg, & Feinberg (2009)

Motivation

Motivation

Motivation

However

may

terms

large

see

agreedusing

get

many

use

Motivation

Motivation

Pomales-Garcia & Liu (2007)

Friesen, Taylor & Britton (2005)

Brophy, Klein, Portsmore & Rogers (2008)

Motivation

Pomales-Garcia & Liu (2007)

Motivation

Motivation

1

Friesen, Taylor & Britton (2005)

Motivation

1

Motivation

1 2 Brophy, Klein, Portsmore & Rogers (2008)

Motivation

1 2

Motivation

1 2 3

Motivation

1 2 3

Motivation

1

2

3

Motivation

Problem Solving Spectrum

Motivation

Problem Solving Spectrum

Motivation

Problem Solving Spectrum

Social tagging harnesses the power of collective human intelligence.

Human intelligence tasks that computers are unable to do.

Motivation

Problem Solving Spectrum

“19th century culture was defined by the novel, 20th century culture by cinema, the culture of the 21st century will be defined by the interface. ”

-- Quoted by Aaron Koblin in the TED talk: Artfully Visualizing Our Humanity

Motivation

Our goal is to build an interactive data mining and visualization interface for EER community.

EER community

Motivation

Our very first attempt to introduce human insight and precision into the analysis of systemic trends.

Weighted Social TaggingWeight

Confidence Rating Document

Tagger

Tag

1

2

3

4

Motivation

Methodology

Data Analysis and Results

Future Work

1

2

3

4

Motivation

Methodology

Data Analysis and Results

Future Work

Methodology

Weighted Social TaggingWeight

Confidence Rating Document

Tagger

Tag

Methodology

Tag Weight Confidence Rating

Tagger

Document

Anthony et al. (2007)

I’m 50% sure that cross-disciplinary weights 10 out of100 as a descriptive term for this paper.

Methodology

cross-disciplinary 10/100 0.5

Tag Weight Confidence Rating

Tagger

Document

Anthony et al. (2007)

Methodology

Anthony et al. (2007)

Tag Weight Confidence Composite

Background

cross-disciplinary 10 0.5 5

Background teams 5 0.3 1.5Background

technology 20 0.5 10

Methodologymix-methods 15 0.7 10.5

Methodologystatistics 15 0.7 10.5

Implicationimplement 20 0.5 10

Implicationencourage 15 0.5 7.5

Methodology

Anthony et al. (2007)

Tag Weight Confidence Composite

Background

cross-disciplinary 10 0.5 5

Background teams 5 0.3 1.5Background

technology 20 0.5 10

Methodologymix-methods 15 0.7 10.5

Methodologystatistics 15 0.7 10.5

Implicationimplement 20 0.5 10

Implicationencourage 15 0.5 7.5

Methodology

Anthony et al. (2007)

Tag Weight Confidence Composite

Background

cross-disciplinary 10 0.5 5

Background teams 5 0.3 1.5Background

technology 20 0.5 10

Methodologymix-methods 15 0.7 10.5

Methodologystatistics 15 0.7 10.5

Implicationimplement 20 0.5 10

Implicationencourage 15 0.5 7.5

Methodology

Anthony et al. (2007)

Tag Weight Confidence Composite

Background

cross-disciplinary 10 0.5 5

Background teams 5 0.3 1.5Background

technology 20 0.5 10

Methodologymix-methods 15 0.7 10.5

Methodologystatistics 15 0.7 10.5

Implicationimplement 20 0.5 10

Implicationencourage 15 0.5 7.5

Methodology

Anthony et al. (2007)

Tag Weight Confidence Composite

Background

cross-disciplinary 10 0.5 5

Background teams 5 0.3 1.5Background

technology 20 0.5 10

Methodologymix-methods 15 0.7 10.5

Methodologystatistics 15 0.7 10.5

Implicationimplement 20 0.5 10

Implicationencourage 15 0.5 7.5

Sum=100

Methodology

Anthony et al. (2007)

Tag Weight Confidence Composite

Background

cross-disciplinary 10 0.5 5

Background teams 5 0.3 1.5Background

technology 20 0.5 10

Methodologymix-methods 15 0.7 10.5

Methodologystatistics 15 0.7 10.5

Implicationimplement 20 0.5 10

Implicationencourage 15 0.5 7.5

Each rating ranges 0~1

Methodology

Anthony et al. (2007)

Tag Weight Confidence Composite

cross-disciplinary 10 0.5 5

Background teams 5 0.3 1.5

technology 20 0.5 10

Methodologymix-methods 15 0.7 10.5

Methodologystatistics 15 0.7 10.5

Implicationimplement 20 0.5 10

Implicationencourage 15 0.5 7.5

Weight x Confidence

Methodology

3 ENE graduate students

152 papers JEE 2005-2009

Methodology

3 ENE graduate students

152 papers JEE 2005-2009

3,456 tags each with a weight and a confidence rating

Methodology

3 ENE graduate students

152 papers JEE 2005-2009

3,456 tags each with a weight and a confidence rating

Trends & core content

Methodology

3 ENE graduate students

152 papers JEE 2005-2009

3,456 tags each with a weight and a confidence rating

Trends & core content

Characteristics of the taggers

Information Retrieval

1

2

3

4

Motivation

Methodology

Data Analysis and Results

Future Work

1

2

3

4

Motivation

Methodology

Data Analysis and Results

Future Work

Data Analysis and Results

3 Hypotheses

Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get:

H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias.

H2 Better description of content of individual papers.

H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias.

Data Analysis and Results

H2 Better description of content of individual papers.

H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

3 Hypotheses

Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get:

H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias.

Data Analysis and Results

0

5

10

15

20

5 10 15 20

Com

posi

te S

core

s fr

om T

agge

r A

Composite Scores from Tagger B

High correlation, Narrow coverage

Data Analysis and Results

0

5

10

15

20

5 10 15 20

Com

posi

te S

core

s fr

om T

agge

r A

Composite Scores from Tagger B

Low correlation, Wide coverage

H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias.

Data Analysis and Results

weight

-0.2254 -0.0542

-0.1737

composite

-0.0969 -0.0378

-0.2226

confidence

0.0581 -0.2105

-0.0489

H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias.

H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias.

Data Analysis and Results

H2 Better description of content of individual papers.

H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

3 Hypotheses

Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get:

H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias.

Data Analysis and Results

H2 Better description of content of individual papers.

H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

3 Hypotheses

Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get:

Data Analysis and ResultsH2 Better description of content of individual papers.

Pomales-Garcia & Liu (2007)

Top 15 keywords

Data Analysis and ResultsH2 Better description of content of individual papers.

Word Frequency Counting Weighted Social Taggingstudents interviews

engineering sex parityeducation student view

participants student involvementskills excellence

teaching ethnographic perspectivequestions perception discrepanciesstudent consensus

professors institutionsstudy undergraduate

excellence participant activitiestechnology qualitative researchclassroom technology usage

more variablesused discursive

Top 15 keywords

Data Analysis and ResultsH2 Better description of content of individual papers.

Word Frequency Counting Weighted Social Taggingstudents interviews

engineering sex parityeducation student view

participants student involvementskills excellence

teaching ethnographic perspectivequestions perception discrepanciesstudent consensus

professors institutionsstudy undergraduate

excellence participant activitiestechnology qualitative researchclassroom technology usage

more variablesused discursive

excellence

excellence

Top 15 keywords

Data Analysis and ResultsH2 Better description of content of individual papers.

Word Frequency Counting Weighted Social Taggingstudents interviews

engineering sex parityeducation student view

participants student involvementskills excellence

teaching ethnographic perspectivequestions perception discrepanciesstudent consensus

professors institutionsstudy undergraduate

excellence participant activitiestechnology qualitative researchclassroom technology usage

more variablesused discursive

technologytechnology usage

Top 15 keywords

Data Analysis and ResultsH2 Better description of content of individual papers.

Word Frequency Counting Weighted Social Taggingstudents interviews

engineering sex parityeducation student view

participants student involvementskills excellence

teaching ethnographic perspectivequestions perception discrepanciesstudent consensus

professors institutionsstudy undergraduate

excellence participant activitiestechnology qualitative researchclassroom technology usage

more variablesused discursive

participants

participants activities

Top 15 keywords

Data Analysis and ResultsH2 Better description of content of individual papers.

Word Frequency Counting Weighted Social Taggingstudents interviews

engineering sex parityeducation student view

participants student involvementskills excellence

teaching ethnographic perspectivequestions perception discrepanciesstudent consensus

professors institutionsstudy undergraduate

excellence participant activitiestechnology qualitative researchclassroom technology usage

more variablesused discursive

interviews

ethnographic perspective

sex parity

student involvement

student view

H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias.

Data Analysis and Results

H2 Better description of content of individual papers.

H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

3 Hypotheses

Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get:

H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias.

Data Analysis and Results

H2 Better description of content of individual papers.

H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

3 Hypotheses

Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get:

Data Analysis and ResultsH3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

Top 20 Keywords 2005-2009

Weighted Social Tagging

Word Frequency Counting

Data Analysis and ResultsH3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

Top 20 Keywords 2005-2009

Weighted Social Tagging

Word Frequency Counting

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009engineering engineering engineering engineering engineeringeducation students students students education

learning education design education students

students learning education research research

research research research design learning

student project university learning ethics

programs knowledge student journal science

study teaching information student journal

journal university study knowledge women

design science journal science teaching

cooperative journal learning university career

university student problem program faculty

faculty course work qualitative development

accreditation process process faculty data

women design science analysis study

college educational women teaching university

assessment faculty faculty study student

work study analysis methods efficacy

laboratory history experts courses nationalprogram transfer participants conceptual participants

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009engineering engineering engineering engineering engineeringeducation students students students education

learning education design education students

students learning education research research

research research research design learning

student project university learning ethics

programs knowledge student journal science

study teaching information student journal

journal university study knowledge women

design science journal science teaching

cooperative journal learning university career

university student problem program faculty

faculty course work qualitative development

accreditation process process faculty data

women design science analysis study

college educational women teaching university

assessment faculty faculty study student

work study analysis methods efficacy

laboratory history experts courses nationalprogram transfer participants conceptual participants

engineeringeducation

students

research

learning

teaching

Generic Terms

...

Data Analysis and ResultsH3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

Top 20 Keywords 2005-2009

Weighted Social Tagging

Word Frequency Counting

Data Analysis and ResultsH3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

Top 20 Keywords 2005-2009

Weighted Social Tagging

Word Frequency Counting

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

assessment

assessment

assessment

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

assessment

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

women

women

women

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

women

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

retention

retention

retention

retention

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

retention

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

survey

survey

survey

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009assessment simulation concept how people learn survey

engagement retention knowledge concept discipline

laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork

skill survey ethnography design women

experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy

problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender

historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education

collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty

concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept

women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity

skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career

creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview

self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12

methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention

accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration

descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment

intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative

bias industry women retention descriptive study

organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference

curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

survey

Data Analysis and ResultsH3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  

15

50

85

120

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Com

posi

te S

core

Top 20 Tags

20052006200720082009

Top ranking tags become less dominant indicates topics are expanding.

1

2

3

4

Motivation

Methodology

Data Analysis and Results

Future Work

1

2

3

4

Motivation

Methodology

Data Analysis and Results

Future Work

Future Work

EER community

Future Work1 Increase number and diversity of taggers

EER community

Future Work1 Increase number and diversity of taggers

2 Ease tagging process

EER community

Future Work1 Increase number and diversity of taggers

2 Ease tagging process

EER community

3 Further analyze trends from different angles

Future Work1 Increase number and diversity of taggers

2 Ease tagging process

4 Analyze characteristics of taggers

EER community

3 Further analyze trends from different angles

Future Work1 Increase number and diversity of taggers

2 Ease tagging process

4 Analyze characteristics of taggers

5 Build an interactive interface

EER community

3 Further analyze trends from different angles

Questions ?

Xin Chen, Nikitha Sambamurthy, Corey Schimpf, Hanjun Xian, Krishna Madhavan

{chen654, snikitha, cschimpf, hxian, cm}@purdue.edu