WO2015128700A1

WO2015128700A1 - Electronic educational content mapping and learning system and a method of ensuring quality teaching and learning effectiveness

Info

Publication number: WO2015128700A1
Application number: PCT/IB2014/059894
Authority: WO
Inventors: Khalid Omar AL MIDFA
Original assignee: Al Midfa Khalid Omar
Priority date: 2014-02-25
Filing date: 2014-03-17
Publication date: 2015-09-03

Abstract

The present invention relates to a computer-implemented quality assurance system for achieving enhanced quality control in teaching and learning in an educational environment such as schools, colleges, universities and the like, precisely in a classroom setup. The invention relates to a proposed method/process divided for ease into four segments, the first segment consisting of creating the course content, time-tagging, tagging the learning outcomes, tagging the content word/verbs and the second segment consists of delivering it via a lecturer and the third stage consists of generating assessment exercise associated with learning outcomes "LO's", and the fourth and most important segment consists of automatic reports generation and automatic rectifications (adaptive and responsive feedback) thereof, among others the most important aspect of this invention and the related proposed software is mapping, monitoring and evaluating the complete education process and stakeholders involved in a complete non-intrusive, unbiased and objective manner.

Description

DESCRIPTION

TITLE

ELECTRONIC EDUCATIONAL CONTENT MAPPING AND LEARNING SYSTEM AND A METHOD OF ENSURING QUALITY TEACHING AND LEARNING EFFECTIVENESS

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to the field of education and information technology, containing terms, images, and features for which background references, footnotes, translations or definitions may be desirable to the reader. The invention relates to the field of education, and more particularly to the field of process and programmed systems for simplifying teaching and learning using neutral and unbiased assessments, timed measurements, aided by management of learning outcomes.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Education is commonly understood to be the basic building block of human existence and core responsibility of societies, governments, families, and so forth. Every member of the society as much possible within certain constraints of finance and feasibility desires to educate himself and his/her family to (educating young children's in traditional schools and upto higher skilled education, including worker training programs, corporate education, professional continuing education, and general adult education) the highest extent possible. Accordingly, a great deal of research has been carried out, and many generations of improvements have been made, in an effort to continuously improve the quality of educational systems and their performance in creating effective and constructive educational outcomes at all levels (that is, for individual learners, for classes, for schools, for school districts, for states, or for nations at large, not mention the distance e-learning). Different and inspiring approaches of educational delivery are being introduced at a rapid frequency, concluding for example in the open courseware efforts being led by leading universities such as Stanford, MIT and organizations such as Microsoft and Google. One of the desired areas where improvements in outcomes have not occurred as quickly as might be expected as a result of radical developments is that of assessing student learning effectiveness, course learning outcome and educational content mapping . For generations, students and industry have relied on traditional methods of grading (which has higher degrees of subjectivity and repetitions) to measure the skill development and to achieve their educational and life goals (for example, obtaining admission into a preferred institution of higher schooling or securing a desired superior job in a multi- national).

Similarly, teachers have used grading systems to showcase performances, abilities and skills to students, parents, administrators, and institutions. Notwithstanding the significance of grading in particular and educational assessments in general, the assessment of educational performance of pupils, instructors, classes, and institutions are still carried out in a largely subjective way. Assessments of student learning effectiveness are currently based upon grading by individual lecturers and self-serving surveys. In consequence, assessments of performance (learning outcomes) tend to be biased and subjective. There is a dire need to improve and objectify assessment of student learning. Educational stakeholders, including for example the Department of Education's and various accreditation entities or authorities, need objective measures to assess actual skill development/performance and not just conventional grades. Assessments based on learning outcomes must reliably determine extent of learning and content of learning such as acquired skills, knowledge, and the like (i.e., what, and to what extent, course learning outcomes have been (or have not been) met). The essentially subjective and biased (and often self-serving) nature of contemporary educational assessment methodologies means that it is difficult to meaningfully and consistently compare learning progress across national boundaries, or even across classes or among teachers within a single department of a single school/college.

The teaching delivery mechanism also remains a very important aspect which forms the essence of skill development. What is needed is a system and associated methods that take advantage of the modern information technology to enable one or more analytical methods of objectively and consistently assessing student learning at different stages, in various zones, and over several spans, in a way that supports extended and effective analysis of the resulting reports to better understand and to improve learning processes and learning outcomes. A sizable number of teaching and learning systems have been attempted and developed over the years for assisting students or users in learning and delivering educational content. The need for quality control in learning and teaching mechanism requires immediate action, which has exponentially increased owing to an increase in the number of students, and in turn the lecturers and at a broader level Universities/Institutions. The duty of evaluating each and every lecture, lecturer, students, session, is very subjective and not to mention laborious. However, these prior art methods are considered to be deficient as mentioned above because they do not truly provide a full proof, accurate yet unobtrusive and interactive computer systems/platforms which can provide the most simplified, easy to use and effective learning and spot-on assessment system.

There are many other problems faced in the quality control of teaching in institutions, essentially the core issues that must be rectified are namely; Assessing Student Learning Effectiveness - Assessment exercise preparation resulting into creation of quizzes, mid-term and end-term is not aligned with the essence of the course, i.e. Learning Outcome, Bloom Tag and Verb, essentially an absolute absence of necessary/mandatory skills development and its monitoring vis-a-vis industrial requirements, Assessing course learning outcome or Educational Content mapping: - Course depth coverage and objective ascertainment of the same, Lecturer teaching assessment, Poor use of classroom time, Presidents/Deans/Top Management level/Parents are unable to monitor actual progress, precise form of course delivery, inappropriate or insufficient learner assessment, Dire need of timely reporting and providing individualized and focused automatic rectifications as and where required, Maintaining and updating database and reports thereof for realtime access for Ministries, Accreditation bodies, higher management and administrators.

As can be seen from the above issues, an effective electronic educational mapping, evaluating and reporting system is crucial and need of the hour to achieve a better, wholesome and comprehensive education for all the stakeholders concerned. Problems are realised at the end of the semester when students complain that certain parts of the course are not taught even though specified or taught but not effectively resulting in a dead-lock. Other ways in which these curriculum shortcomings come to light is when the majority of students perform poorly in examinations at the end of the term, resulting in a crisis of no u- turn for students and universities which face a drop in their standards. Conventionally these problems are ineffectively addressed in ways which involves higher percentage of subjective intrusion, unavoidable laborious manual mapping which is unbiased and unobjective. Even if a university hires or adopts a vigilance/surveillance mechanism it becomes a cumbersome and obtrusive task and use of inspectors may hamper the concentration of some instructors. CONCLUSION

The solution to the above problems faced in maintaining and enhancing the standard of teaching and learning exists largely around student learning effectiveness and course learning outcomes, more specifically effective teaching and comprehensive learning. The present methods of preventing the problems from occurring are still at a primitive stage, ultimately there is actually no accurate, wholesome and easy to use method to monitor teaching through electronic platforms.

The need for a real time , objective and unbiased methodology to help achieve a better delivery and learning of educational content for today's teaching practices that center around an electronic content mapping and learning system is of such a paramount importance that without it the education system will proceed to a slow death, i.e. gradual decline in standards. This methodology would aim to replace the current methods of quality control and performance enhancement so that any of the above mentioned discrepancies would be drastically reduced. As the electronic platform/program is the platform on which most teaching occurs and it is through monitoring of it that quality in education will rise, the solution presented here pertains to a method of creating, tagging, uploading and delivering the educational contents and a system of assessing, collecting, reporting and providing automatic rectifications thereof. The solution essentially falls under Electronic contents mapping and learning system.

BREIF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

This invention will be used to achieve enhanced quality control of teaching in education enterprises such as universities by monitoring of the content delivery and student learning effectiveness.

The invention relates to a proposed method/process conducted over an programmed software, divided for ease into four segments, the first segment consisting of creating course content, time- tagging, tagging the learning outcomes, tagging the verbs and the second segment consists of delivering it via a lecturer and the third stage consists of generating assessment exercise associated with learning outcomes "LO's", and the fourth and most important segment consists of automatic reports generation and automatic rectifications thereof, among others the most important aspect of this invention is mapping, monitoring and evaluating the complete education process non- intrusively, in an unbiased and unprejudiced manner.

The first segment essentially called as defining and tagging stage allows the subject matter expert or "SME" to create the course content, its outline and tag the content with various factors/tools, namely; Time, Learning Outcome, Content Word/Verb and Annotations. This essentially includes time period tagging by the SME which would constitute assigning each learning material or image with an anticipated time of completion as per SME standards which are in line with the International standards. Learning outcome will be pre-assigned, onto the content; verb would be created simultaneously from the text by the SME. The second stage is known as the execution phase in which an instructor in a university or school will use these pre-defined contents with the added features to instruct the subject matter or course. This stage starts when the content is uploaded on the platform and is assigned and indicated to the specific instructor for delivery.

The third stage consists of generating assessment exercise associated or in entirety based on learning outcomes "LO's", the software part of this invention will be running through this uploading and executing stages of the content/image at the background. It would provide a platform for delivery and interaction among the instructors and students and would be collecting all the data generated and analysing it step by step. For an example time spent on each learning material/ image by the users, LO's and word content stimulated, filled up assessment forms and the answer sheets of the assessment exercise, etc.

The fourth and most important segment consists of automatic reports generation and automatic rectifications thereof; the data collected as mentioned above would be stored in institutions server databases or our databases. The software part of this invention will be working simultaneously with the database collection/generation, and would generate automatic categorized reports, determining the course depth and coverage, gauging essential core learning's, instructor's effectiveness, areas of immediate action and method and material for the same, not to mention generating alerts.

ADVANTAGES OF THE PROPOSED METHOD AND OR SYSTEM

The main advantage of this method vis-a-vis currently practiced conventional method is achieving greater quality control in institutions in a complete unbiased and with negligible subjective interference. The system performs its functions in a complete unobtrusive fashion without any interferences whatsoever to instructors and students. The system essentially aids and supports in almost perfect delivery of lectures, time management, learning the desired and required skills, objective ascertainment and reporting of electronic content delivery and learning. Further deployments and developments of this system may in fact assist all the stakeholders especially the instructors and students to learn and develop their core areas, i.e. lecture delivery in tune with student learning and student learning in tune with industrial requirements.

It allows the educational institutions to evaluate not just teachers as to their teaching abilities but students as to their learning effectiveness, course depth and coverage and assessing and grading students based on course delivery. It will guarantee a more integrated, standardized and consistent teaching method without wasting the precious time. The real- time evaluations encored in this method facilitates the provision of "action and reaction" time, essentially giving the much required rectification period and ensuring a wholesome quality development. Thus avoiding the scenario of no -u turn and/or last minute duresses. It provides an innovative paradigm shift in tracking and measuring objectively teaching and learning effectiveness, a classroom is no longer a black box but instead an intelligent Learning Analytical Engine that is transparent, accurate, fast and performance enhancer.

1. Summarized version of the core advantages of this System includes :- a. Fully automated and Non- intrusive integration b. Predicative and Adaptive support for students and lecturers c. Easy reporting and navigations with its user friendly graphical user interface d. Real-time feedback anytime and anywhere. e. Teaching and learning effectiveness enhancer

This System provides real-time dashboards to track and identify performance and problems. There is no need to wait till the end of the semester when it is too late to resolve issues.

It automatically defines the correct weight age distribution of Student Learning Outcome and maps them to various assignments saving great deal of valuable time and effort, enabling the transmission of automatic alerts to relevant individuals when performance is not on track. The time consuming often convoluted calculations involved in measuring and calculating the overall Student Learning Effectiveness and the Lecturer Teaching Effectiveness is generated automatically whenever and where ever required. It provides an innovative method of prompting Dynamic student feedback to determine how the course is progressing and how it is being conceived by the students. The enabling feature of this system is that it provides an objective method of measuring and evaluating important KPIs at all levels.

POTENTIAL USES

Institutional bodies looking to meet international quality standards and accreditation can use this system to instil guaranteed confidence by raising their quality of teaching, making it transparent and developing a mechanism of mapping every stage of education delivery, i.e. ensuring accountability and effectiveness among all the stakeholders concerned especially the instructors and learners.

This system can be applied by many institutions to ensure better, easy to use effective education delivery for the students, the crucial blocks on which rests the future of a society, country and world at large. The system provides/generates real time assessments and reports which is also accessible in real-time and is useful to the stakeholders like lectures, dean, administrators, directors and above all the ministries and accreditation bodies. If this method of electronic mapping of educational process is implemented, it will take the effectiveness of course delivery, student learning's and processing and reporting to a new level altogether. It will standardize classroom education, cultivate the standards of high quality assessment, reporting and in- time rectifications. Not to mention it'll be completely unobtrusive, as well as in real-time. This System will essentially automate all the boring and mundane tasks that consume valuable time. Productive time that can be put to better use for research, professional development and more effective teaching, It automatically provides the academic performance of all students just by a click of a button. Allows the instructor to drill down into any of the components such as the syllabus to provide a complete breakdown of all major components for example the total percentage of lectures delivered, various learning outcomes and assessments covered. This System can provide a snap-shot of all learning activities in real-time and any-time. One can further examine the details of the various assessments and System will also flag areas of potential problems or concerns. A detailed summary of each question and their respective learning outcome can be obtained. This can help the instructor to better understand how students are performing and advice those who may need additional support to get back on performance track.

With an easy to use interface the instructor can obtain class-wide results showing poor performing students. This just-in-time information allows the instructor to take appropriate measures. The overall performance of all assessments can be shown graphically for easy comparison of the entire class. This System truly empowers the instructor to become more proactive, effective teacher and productive. All in all the invention focuses on precise tracking, development and improvement in students' learning effectiveness.

BREIF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING FIGURES

Additional aspects of the invention will become clearer upon reviewing the non-limiting embodiments described in the specifications which serve the purpose of explaining in details the invention disclosed herein, one skilled in the art will recognize that the particular embodiments are exemplary in nature and does not limit the scope of the invention in any which way.

Fig. 1 is the process flow diagram which illustrates the method and processes involved in the invention, including but not limited to usage of particular terms and variables in the preferred embodiment.

Fig.2 is process flow diagram illustrating an exemplary method of structuring the course and learning material content.

Fig.3 is a process flow diagram comprising of a flow chart depicting or illustrating an exemplary method of course defining and tagging the variables.

Fig.4. is process flow diagram comprising of a flow chart illustrating an exemplary method of course content assignment per lecturer, per classroom and on the like pre-requisites.

Fig.5 is a process flow diagram illustrating a broader exemplary method of lecture teaching/delivery in accordance with the present invention

Fig.6 is process flow diagram illustrating an exemplary method comprising of an integrated hybrid software and hardware depicting data transmission and its processing upto the storage in accordance with the present invention.

Fig.7. illustrates exemplary system architecture, according to present invention

Fig.8 is flow diagram illustrating an exemplary method of lecture teaching and associated process steps in accordance of the present invention

Fig.9 is a flow diagram illustrating an exemplary method of overall system process and method in accordance with the present invention.

Fig. 10 is a flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process of proactive assessment in accordance with the present invention. Fig.ll is a flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process of conducting the assessment and associated methods in accordance with the present invention

Fig.12 is flow diagram illustrating an exemplary process of data input, data storage data marts and data output

Fig. 13 illustrates an exemplary president view of an exemplary overall effectiveness report in accordance with the present invention.

Fig.14 illustrates an exemplary president view of an exemplary overall effectiveness report of a particular campus in accordance with the present invention

Fig.15 illustrates an exemplary president view of an exemplary overall effectiveness report of a particular college in accordance with the present invention

Fig.16 illustrates an exemplary president view of an exemplary overall effectiveness report of a particular college in accordance with the present invention

Fig.17 illustrates an exemplary president view of an exemplary overall program effectiveness report in accordance with the present invention

Fig.18 illustrates an exemplary president view of an exemplary overall course effectiveness report in accordance with the present invention

Fig.19 illustrates an exemplary president view of an exemplary lecture teaching effectiveness report in accordance with the present invention

Fig.20 illustrates an exemplary view of the student learning effectiveness in accordance with the present invention.

Fig.21 illustrates an exemplary report of the Lecturer teaching effectiveness in accordance with the present invention

Fig.22 illustrates an exemplary report of lecturer teaching effectiveness in accordance with the present invention. Definitions

1. USERS: - As used herein are those natural persons or automated machines or combination of both, who/which are defined in this process setup as a point of contact for a particular stage of particular interface.

2. OPERATORS: - As used herein, are same as users and can be interchanged.

3. SME:- As used herein, is a subject matter expert and forms a part of the USERS as mentioned above, SME are those who may conceive and gather, the course content, then structures it and conceives the syllabus, not to mention the classifying or labeling the variables on to the learning material.

4. CONFIGURATION: - As used herein, is the maximum and minimum expected hybrid of software and hardware required for successfully running the process, alongwith all the enabling features in a campus or college or an university.

5. LEARNER: - As used herein are those who seek to acquire knowledge or skills through learning; learners can be individual, set of individuals, groups and the like.

6. OBJECTIVES: - As used herein, are those parameters that are pre-defined at the conceiving stage, which eventually becomes the aim so to say of the course. This can be per learning material, per course, per program and/or a combination of all of these.

7. GOALS: - As used herein, may be used interchangeably with Objectives.

8. TOOLS: - As used herein, are those pre-configured, pre-defined features of the collaborative platform, which enables a user/operator to customize the course content as intended, assists the users in delivering it, assists the etc.

9. COURSE CONTENT: - As used herein, are those learning material in electronic form which are gathered, structured and tagged and eventually delivered by the lecturer.

10. COURSE SYLLABUS:- As used herein, is the outline of the course content, depicting what is inside the content as to its brief, title, objectives, references if any, etc. 11. ASSINGMENT: - As used herein, is the handing over of the pre-defined, tagged contents via the collaborative platform, for the actual-real time teaching/delivery by the Lecturers/Instructors .

12. DEPARTMENT: - As used herein, are those structured physical defined rooms for a particular area of study or higher study.

13. SPECIALIZATION: - As used herein are those areas of study which are/can is pursued only after achieving/securing the basic qualifications in the same area of study at an earlier stage.

14. INTERFACE: - As used herein are those integrated hybrid ports wherein the user is enabled to intelligently interact with the software.

15. COURSE OUTCOME: - As used herein are those aims or minimum thresholds which must be achieved after the course is complete which are pre-defined at the time of conceiving the course.

16. LEARNING: - As used herein, means a process of acquiring knowledge and skills.

17. STAKEHOLDERS:- As used herein means stakeholders of learning and teaching, including but not limited to users, learners, students, faculty, instructor, teacher, dean, staff, accreditation bodies, educational bodies, UNESCO, Department of Education, all other stakeholders with a controllable and substantial interest in education like, parents, communities, recruiters, publishers, society in general.

18. ACCREDITATION BODIES: - As used herein are those governmental or nongovernmental bodies/agencies which are by virtue of a statue or deemed authorized to confer a university, college, school and the like and/or a program in it a certificate to run based on the acquired pre-defined standards.

19. ASSESSMENT: - As used herein an exercise in the form of questions, quizzes, papers and the like which are prepared aligning the objectives and put up for attempting by the end users or the students. 20. ASSESSOR: - As used herein is a learning stakeholder (which can be a faculty, a grader, a teaching assistant, a teacher, an instructor or the like) or an automated grading system or a combination of both.

21. IDEA: - As used herein is an acronym for Integrated development environment for assessments, which is a comprehensive and all inclusive mechanism/platform for conducting the assessment and recordal thereof.

22. QASIC: - As used herein Quality Application specific integrated circuit on which the iiiQASC software is embedded

23. iiiQASS:- As used herein is an Intelligent integrated and interactive quality based application specific software.

24. SPSS: As used herein product is to be integrated

25. CMS: - As used herein content management system is a system of composed of the integration and summation of management of all the course structuring, tagging and delivery and outcome of the content.

26. LMS: - As used herein learning management is a system of all the learning process composed of all the stages

27. TAGGING: - As used herein is a process (classifying or labeling) of using the variables in a way to align with the accreditation guidelines and/or SME judgment and/or broader objectives of a course/specialization

28. QSNAP: - As used herein is an acronym for Quality video sequence non-linear array panel, which is a hybrid of software and hardware used in order to capture real-time lecture delivery, automatically.

29. QppT: - As used herein is an acronym for Quality Power point presentation which is collaborative platform for lecture delivery with various enabled features for a comprehensive teaching and learning 30. DATA WAREHOUSE: - As used herein is a collection centre wherein all the data inputs, raw data, processed data and data outputs are stored and which acts as a medium for transferring the same.

31. DATAMART: - As used herein can be used interchangeably for Data warehouse.

32. MAPPING: - As used herein is a term for precisely monitoring, depicting the flow, reach, depth of the course content or the learning material content

33. SLO: - As used herein Student learning outcomes, which are essentially the extent to which students or end users have acquired the desired/intended skills or knowledge for a particular discipline

34. SLE: - As used herein Student learning effectiveness is the extent to which a student has performed which is based on the assessment exercise attempted

35. CLO: - As used herein is the Course Learning Outcome

36. PLO: - As used herein is the Program Learning Outcome

37. LTE: - As used herein Lecturer Teaching Effectiveness is the term for gauging the teacher's efficiency which is based on various factors namely, time consumed, depth reached of a particular course assigned, SLE, attendance and the likes

38. KPI: - As used herein Key performance indicators are those graphs showcasing the variations from expected or intended performances.

39. REPORTS:- As used herein an individualized and/or combination of all those results/details which gets stored in the data warehouse and automatically processed through internal mechanism showcasing all the mappings precisely at all the levels.

40. SAN: - As used herein means storage area network.

41. VPN: - As used herein means Virtual Private network.

42. WPAN: - As used herein means Wireless Private Area Network

43. PAN: - As used herein means Private area network 44. INTRANET: - As used herein is a computer network that uses internet protocol technology and is specifically refers to the network within university, particular campus, college, classrooms, and the like.

45. EXTRANET: - As used herein is a computer network that allows controlled access from outside for a specific educational or business purpose.

46. SMARTBOARD: - As used herein Is an aid or an tool for delivering the lectures which is connected to the instructors PDA, Laptop or the like

47. BI: - As used herein business intelligence is a set of theories, methodologies, architectures, and technologies that transform raw data into meaningful and useful information for business purposes

48. BIG DATA: - As used herein is the collection or sum total of all data.

DETAILS OF THE INVENTION

The inventor has conceived, and condensed to practice, a method and system for effective content delivery and mapping learning levels reached and generating specific reports and addressing rectifications required thereof, it takes care/addresses the shortcomings of the prior art that were discussed earlier in the background section.

One or more different inventions may be described in the present application. This simple and effortlessly feasible solution is a method comprising of the creation of the content, tagging it, its deployment, preparing and taking assessment which is aligned with tagging defined variables and automatic rectifications provided by the provision of "action and reaction" encored in this solution. Although the system and methods described herein are described in the context of classroom setup or classes, these systems and methods may also be used with classes that are not conducted in an enclosed classroom. In addition, the systems and methods herein are not restricted to classes conducted by schools, universities, but could be used in corporate training, certificate programs and any other educational settings. The features of these systems and how it is proposed to be used will now be described with references to the drawings as and when required. Throughout the drawings, reference numbers may be re-used to indicate correspondence between referenced elements. The figures, descriptions and implementation method, etc. does not in any ways limits the scope of the invention in any which way. Moreover methods and processes described herein are not limited to any particular order, and the steps relating thereto can be performed in other arrangements that are appropriate. For an example, the described steps may be performed in an order other than specifically disclosed herein, or in multiple stages or combined in one format. The various methods of the systems described herein can be implemented as software applications, hardware and/or software modules, or components on one or more desktops, laptops, PDA, tablets, and the likes. Essentially headings of sections, process & methods, steps or algorithms, etc. described in a sequential order, such processes, methods and algorithms provided in this patent application and the title of this patent application are for convenience only, and are not taken as limiting the disclosure in any way, unless stated otherwise, i.e. to say that other embodiments may be realized and that logical and mechanical changes may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. The system as summarized in the brief above and as illustrated by Fig. 1 would work in the following preferred manner 101, beginning from the first stage 102 of content creation, called as the conceiving/defining or the structuring stage . This stage is further sub-divided into two phases, 103 namely the organizing phase and the tagging phase. The tagging phase is then further subdivided into three phases, namely 104 learning objective/outcome tagging, time tagging and verb tagging. Then the second stage of Execution 105 or the delivery stage which is further sub- divided into three phases, namely assignment, execution and recordal of attendance, the second phase 106 of execution is further divided into stimulation phase and delivery phase. Then the third stage 107 of assessment or evaluation stage which is further divided into three phases, works on the i.e. assessment exercise generation phase, Conducting Phase and assessment recordal phase. The systems process or the inventions final and fourth stage is the automatic report generation 108, which is further sub-divided into three phases, namely report generation phase and automatic and adaptive feedback phase ( to the students and parents) and responsive feedback to the (instructors).

As illustrated by Fig. 2 at the organizing phase, which is the starting point, the SME or the Neutral User/Creator or the First Operator, (this could be the head or dean of the department of a particular specialization/field), this user will be conceiving the content 201 or may modify or use an already existing content and at the same time or at a later stage but not after the stage of uploading, then would create the course syllabus 202 which would be composed of many variables, then make ready for conversion of the course 203 conceived or modified for "Qppt", then 204 would also emphasis word contents. (These tagging's need not necessarily be done in a sequential order or particular manner but could be attached on the discretion and adjustments of the SME, however before the beginning of the next execution stage). This educational content can include, for example, multimedia presentations, lecture material, course files, and the likes.

As illustrated by Fig. 3, the First phase of the Second Stage of Tagging begins here namely the tagging of Learning Objectives/Goals; it would be those objectives that SME desires the students/learners for a given content or in course as a whole. SME may 301 also generate Learning Objectives/Goals based on a combination of accreditation requirements and the SME's own criteria. The user interface and the associated toolbar provided by the customized software and backed up by the circuit and interlinked database hardware, would then be used to tag this Learning Objectives/Goal/s for a given/specified course or content. For an example, one possible Learning Objectives/Goal in a Mathematics class for a specific course of Calculus might be that the students/learners must learn how to compute derivation of an equation and could be defined in the program as LO 1, to begin with and so on and so forth. However it is to be noted that for an example in a particular course or subject in its entirety may or may not contain all the LO's distributed equally, i.e. if a particular course for an example has one hundred (100) texts files and the SME has determined ten (10) must have LO's in it (specifying it from LOl to LO10), then it may happen that from files one to forty there isn't even a single LO covered or defined as designed by the SME on the user interface of the customized software. Also these learning objectives may or may not be shared prior to the commencing of the delivery of the lecture. These pre-defined learning objectives/outcomes which are in line with the accreditation standards would be aligned with the assessment exercises which would then determine the actual intended skill developments and actual knowledge grasp. Accreditation requirements as mentioned above can include standards or desired competencies for courses defined by accreditation entities, for an example such as "The United States Department of Education" and the "Council for Higher Education Accreditation" (CHEA) in the United States of America, the Commission for Academic Accreditation "CAA" as esteemed body of Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research "MOHESR", and Knowledge and Human Resource Development "KHDA" in the UAE, and the liked in the other parts of the world. For an example each accreditation requirement for a particular module of the subject can be used as a Learning Objectives/Goal for that course or alternatively as mentioned above.

Now the second sub phase within the second stage of the tagging after conceiving the content and tagging the LO's, is the tagging of time variable 302, another important feature of this collaborative platform or software, this would be tagged onto the content by the SME. These time tags are basically time periods in numbers, (precisely hours, minutes, seconds and milliseconds) which is the expected time of completion for a particular course file, this maximum limitation on the time cap per learning material is based upon the course intricacy and SME's own judgment, which will have enough knowledge of the subject matter to do so. Further theses time tags will be hidden from the instructor or the succeeding or the second user. Firstly in order to gauge the actual time differences; The instructor's actual time of delivery if it's within the expected time, upon processing by the software, then that would be indicated as an indicator of the instructor having ability to make good judgments but not necessarily having good teaching abilities, at this phase of the processing. The software calculating the average time spent (which is calculated on the basis of cumulative time spent on each learning material or course file) would vary within a pre-defined narrow range so that the instructors would not differ from the expected time and secondly to make the delivery (which is the most important aspect of educational quality enhancement) more focused, more non-obtruding. Another important factor to this content creation or structuring is that SME has to be a neutral person in order to give credibility to the whole process, if this important pre-step is not complied with which is the must have distinction between the first and the second user then the authentication of the evaluation would fall flat. The third sub-phase of the second stage of tagging, i.e. the time tagging is the tagging of the content word in the content/verb 303, that is those collaborative or interactive words which are to be stimulated during the delivery of the course. The tagging of the content word/verb is also done by the SME and on the interface provided by the platform. These content words/verbs are those interactive materials which are created and presented on the platform by not highlighting it, but by just outlining the text by a very thin rectangular box making it almost invisible, basically capturing the verb, i.e. the key words or texts or figures or shapes, etc. that cannot be skipped during the delivery stage of the course. The essence of this tagging of the content word/verb is to ensure capturing the delivery of the course content and to also to ensure its depth reached as pre- conceived by the First Operator or SME with or without in line with accreditation guidelines. The instructor would have the leverage provided by the unique features of this tailored software and the associated toolbar, to encircle, focus and underline which is basically called as stimulation of the notified content, content words/verbs. This software would record, analyze and respond by reporting to this interactions generated by using any of the features as mentioned resulting into a stimulation. These contents which are delivered via the lecture would be stored in the data warehouse and is accessible by the touch/click of a button, another unique feature of this platform. As part of the process at a particular stage, the software would also generate report by calculating on the basis of captured stimulation, depth of the course touched, using the logic that the verbs once or more than once stimulated would be mean it has been encountered and interacted with, implying detailed and length reached of the content.

The conceiving stage involving the structuring and tagging the content ends here.

As illustrated by Fig. 4 and before the beginning of the execution stage the defined and tagged content in the above stage is to be assigned by a User/operator (which would be the administrator, using the admin interface) 40 las per the following fixed or varying variables, i.e. campuses, colleges, departments, semesters, sections, programs, specializations, lectures and students 402. Once the content is assigned as above, then the lecturers 404 per course, per semester and per section is to be assigned, alongwith the students 405 per course, per semesters and per section.

Now the Second stage and again one of the most important stages, which completely encompasses and imbibes the key components or features of this software or the collaborative platform, is also called as the Execution stage. Herein the instructor in a university, college or school or in a corporate training setup would be assigned with the conceived and tagged content or learning material for the relevant subject, this assignment takes place on the user interface as provided to the SME or the Dean or Administrator (which will be explained later and is also known as the third operator or user). This stage starts with the commencement of the session, more precisely simultaneously with the beginning of the course; the collaborative platform also called as "Qppt" is then uploaded with the learning material, and the lecturer starts delivering the lecture in the, as referenced by Fig.5 and Fig 6 . The software which works in the background provides the interactive platform and calculates time spent on each content/image, difference between actual time spent and expected pre-assigned time, generates stimulations, captures these stimulations, provides toolbar to use the emphasized word in the content and other multiple functions such as linking the attendance of the students 503 and instructors via 501 RFID to ensure cross-check. The RFID hardware 502 is shown embedded at the entrance of the classroom.

As illustrated by Fig.6, the system shall be integrated and/or comprised of the hardware (comprising of a "QASIC" and "DSP" on the part of the Smart board and an USB or the like interface and "iii QASIC Software" on the part of the PDA/P.C. ), from a smart board/Qppt 601, i.e. the platform whereon the lecture is delivered, an 602 input interface is attached to the Qppt which acts a medium/tunnel for transfer of the data or activities and/or clicks and/or annotations made on this Qppt. Data thus generated gets transferred via the input interface to the 603 Digital Signal Processor, which is the sub-processor, essentially filtering out the disturbances, noises and the like, it then further transmits the data through wire or signals to the hardware known as quality controlling application specific integrated circuit 604 also called as QASIC. Herein the data and the signal gets processed as to the number of clicks, learning objective achieved, important slides identified, a complete synchronization and standardization with the smartboard/Qppt takes place at this stage. QASIC then further transmits the data to 605 PAN and/or WPAN which further transmits the data via wireless medium to WPAN or PAN on the P.C. part which gets further transmitted to the 606 USB or the like interface, which acts as medium for transferring the data to the 607intelligent integrated and interpretive QASIC software, which essentially processes, develops and generates the reports based on the accumulated and transferred data based on the internal predefined algorithms and coding and variables such as time, LO, words stimulated, etc. The data thus collected is transferred to the 608 datamart or the database, which accumulates all the data from the software and through the output port acts as a facilitator in sending those data.

Apart from the above ASIC, there are many interfaces provided in this preferred embodiment for an example a network interface cards (NIC). Generally, NIC's may control the sending and receiving of data packets over computer network; other types of interfaces may for example support other peripherals used with computing device. Among the interfaces provided are Ethernet interfaces, frame relay interfaces, cable interfaces, DSL interfaces, graphics interface, and the like. In addition, various types of interfaces may be provided such as, for example, the universal serial bus (USB), serial, Intranet, Extranet, Ethernet, Fireware, PCI, parallel, radio frequency (RF), Bluetooth, near- field communication(NFC), TCP/IP,ISDN, fast Ethernet interfaces, Gigabit Ethernet interfaces, asynchronous transfer mode(ATM) interfaces, fiber data distributed interfaces(FDDIs), and the like. These interfaces may include ports appropriate for communication with appropriate media. In some cases, they may also include an independent processor and, in some stances, volatile and/or nonvolatile memory (e.g. RAM). Although the system shown in Fig.7, illustrates one specific model for executing and computing device for implementing one or more of the inventions described herein, it is by no means the only and the best model on which certain features and techniques of this invention can be described or implemented. For instance, a single processor may be used, and such processors may be present in a single device or distributed among any number of devices. In one of the models, a single processor may handle all of the work flow, while in other models there might be bifurcations in the work flow assigned to different processors. For an example, a system may be used in furtherance to this invention mentioned herein that include a campus/client device (such as 704 PDA's, Tablets, Laptop's etc.) and 702 server systems. Regardless of the network device configuration, the system of the present invention may employ one or more memories such as remote memory block and local memory configured to store data, program instructions, etc. Program instructions may control execution of or comprise an operating interface. In many cases, one or more shared services and client devices may be operable and may be useful for providing common services 703 to client or actual end-users.

The input devices as required for providing the input such as content, tagging, interacting, could be a keyboard, touch screen, microphone, mouse, touch pad or the likes or any combination thereof. Output devices may be of any type suitable for providing output to one or more users, whether remote or local to system and may include but not limited to visual output, screen interface, speakers, printers or any combination thereof. Memory may be random- access memory having any structure for use by processors for example to run software. Storage devices temporary or permanent 702 may be provided by the institution or corporate body and may be provided by the developers which may include flash memory, magnetic hard drives, or the like. The present invention may be implemented on a distributed computing network, such as having any number of clients and /or servers. Referring to Fig.7, there is shown a block diagram depicting an exemplary model of implementing at a least a portion of a system as provided in the invention. Accordingly, any number of clients may be provided. Each client may run software for implementing institutional side portion of the present invention, in addition any number of servers may be provided for handling requests received from one or more users of the institutions. Users and servers/developers may communicate with one another via one or more electronic networks 705, but local area network, virtual private network 703 or closed Ethernet network is the preferred one.

As illustrated by Fig.8 this stage of execution comprises a series of processes collectively facilitating effective learning by way of demonstrating familiarity with the subject, depth of knowledge, and particularly delivering and learning skills, high-skills which are the need for industry. This stage is completely unconnected with the conceiving stage, learning objectives or goals as has been predefined would be taught without skipping through this execution stage, which would be ensured by the process of stimulations as would be pre-defined by the SME, the content word/verbs which are thinly marked would act as milestones/assurance points of content coverage. The software which will be running in the background would capture and take note of this progress and release the reports of these checked points to the assembled hardware which must be coupled with this software as mentioned herein above, reference to Fig 6. This software would perform all its functions through its unique in-built features in a complete un-obtrusive manner on a Quality or Interactive platform called as 801 "Qppt" referenced as Fig 8. Once the lectures are in process on this platform, the lectures may use its features as to clicking on the 802 virtual keyboards or word contents and make one and/or more 803 annotations in the form of shapes or notes and the likes. Once the lecture/s is/are 804 concluded, the 805 attendance gets generated automatically for that particular classroom. The device of Second operator, i.e. the instructor which could be a Laptop, PDA, Tablet and the like, from where the instructor part of the software would run, it shall be connected to the institution central server or database via the mechanism as described in Fig. 6. The moment the content is delivered by the instructor, a number of delivery variables will be logged to create customized reports which will be discussed later in the third stage. Stimulated here means logged or interacted with, so each time the instructor goes to the content word/verb, focuses on it, uses it and explains it to the end- users/operator, it gets stimulated and in turn gets recorded by the software working completely unobtrusively in the background. The actual time spent vis-a-vis expected completion time of the content or per learning material is done by the internal time calculation mechanism of this software which may generate warning signals to the lecturers, administrators in real time in case of time usage beyond prescribed limits and/or otherwise, there will be recording of this raw data by the software in real-time during the lecture, on to database server and the likes 902. A degree of variation of roughly around 20% but not more than 25% will be provided to compensate for different teaching styles of individual instructors, depending upon the style, however any variance more than this set percentage would be reported as exceeding the standards. This method of timing and stimulating differs substantially from the conventional methods of content delivery by using the above functions that it is individualized by exactly timing the learning material and focused delivery and recording of stimulation ensuring depth and coverage at all times.

The actual time spent will be the net time which encompasses the time spent while returning back to a taught material/image for reference. It will not be a simple calculation of time from the beginning till the end of the content. By the use and recording feature of stimulation provided by the software, it would be ensured that the instructor is not skipping the learning material and is covering the most if not all the content in the lecture. The delivery of the content would be done on the collaborative platform "Qppt" 901 provided by the customized software rather than use of conventional projectors, boards, and the like etc. making delivery and stimulation more easy, more effective. The software also defines and/or aligns with the data repositories, establishes routines for and carrying out data collection regarding various aspects of the learning environment ( for example organizational structures within a university, course catalogs, learner rosters, faculty rosters, previous learning histories at the same or other institution, regulatory requirements such as proficiency tests, etc.

The process herein described may be composed of a unique feature basically enabled by a preprogrammed, software- hardware hybrid, 903 called as "QSNAP", which is a dynamic automated video capturing system and gets triggered automatically for a short period of time, capturing some pre-defined periods of the lecture delivery, which is completely non-obtrusive, partially hidden, and captures real-time delivery.

All the learning material delivered and taught gets stored in the 902 hardware as delivered data. The execution/delivery stage ends here.

The third stage of the invention or patent forms the bed-rock of the whole system, i.e. the stage after content creation and its delivery, wherein the instructor assesses in multiple phases and steps, the end users/students in order for the data repository linked with the software to generate customized, precise, individualized and/or combined reports.

The instructor/s after the course content/learning material delivery, is provided with the unique feature of this invention to take out the relevant multimedia or the like files from the data repository, i.e. those learning materials, Learning Objectives/Goals, stimulated words, which are the most relevant (by instructors, SME's own judgment and/or based on accreditation bodies guidelines and/or a mixture of both) linked with the overall and precise skill development in a particular field of subject, and create multiple series of questions. The software here provides a critical gauging and checking mechanism wherein with a precise and one hundred percent accuracy, it ensures alignment of the desired, pre-defined objectives/goals with the assessment exercise, questions, quizzes, tests and the like. Each of the Learning Objectives/Goals may be aligned with one or more assessment questions or exercises, not necessarily related/aligned in manner showing one question linked with one Learning Objectives/Goal; the assessment will be offered to students to measure their progress only after completion of the Learning Objectives/Goals and/or defined course content. For an example after four chapters are covered in a course and the pre-defined LO's have been taught and words stimulated, an assessment such as tests, etc. that covers the Learning Objectives/Goals for all these four chapters will be offered/provided to the student. Another example criterion for determining achievement of Learning Objectives/Goals is based on questions of assessments, rather than linking with grades. For instance, individual questions within an assessment exercise may be assigned to one or more Learning Objectives/Goals. Questions 1-6 on a test, for example, might relate to one Learning Objectives/Goal, while question 7-15 relate to another Learning Objectives/Goal. As illustrated by Fig. 10, this process as mentioned is performed through this unique and novel interface called herein as 1001 "IDEA". Wherein the lecturer preparing the assessment exercise easily finds those contents filtered for precisely linking the 1002 LO's with the questions. Thus, answering a certain questions, number of questions, or certain parts of questions correctly can demonstrate achievement of one or more Learning Objectives/Goals. Moreover, some course outcome/s may or may not be associated with any pre-defined learning goals. The software provides for ensuring 1003 alignment between these CLO's and the Quizzes and automatically provides mechanism for grading the questions with a particular value, weightage and the likes, in short a numerical value, defining the maximum and minimum expectation limits. When the alignment takes place between CLO and Questions, it gets converted into Student Learning Outcome. When the student attempts these assessments the summation of information that evolves is termed as exam/quiz/lab results, which when linked with SLO and in terms of percentage becomes SLE, essentially depicting the total course/learning outcomes, achieved by a particular student/user, group of students in a classroom or otherwise, in the college, university and the like.

Once the assessment exercise preparation is over, the next step is to for the administrator to now assign assessment forms generated automatically, for all those students/end users in a group or otherwise that are to be offered assessment exercise, this is provided, and to be filled up and submitted via each student's interface. As illustrated by Fig.11, conducting 1101 of the exercise begins, first ensuring the scheduling 1102 is done, for every classroom, colleges, program and semester wise, then the students as per the schedule attempts 1103 the exercise. The exercise can be in the form of quizzes, questions, articles and submissions. Once the students take the exam, i.e. it is conducted 1104, precisely once the submissions are made, the database stores the assessed material, which gets processed automatically based on the unique coding of the software, and generates reports 1105 and adaptive and predictive feedbacks 1106 for lecturers and parents precisely and dean and president broadly. Eventually evaluating 1108, the student learning effectiveness and Lecturer teaching effectiveness. The hardware or the data repository/warehouse herein (Fig. 12) will store the assessments, correct answers, corresponding grading value and the like as assessment data. The administrator which has now assigned assessment forms generated automatically, for all those students/end users in a group or otherwise to those offered assessment exercise, and after taking the exams/exercise and respective submissions the data (1201 data sources) gets stored to the 1202 data warehouse comprising of meta data, raw data and summary data, as referenced in Fig. 12. This data warehouse sends the processed data to the 1203 respective/classified shelf's 1203, which in turn is sent to the respective 1204 stakeholders as described. The assessment exercise as described earlier can be in any form like multiple choice questions, topic on written submissions like projects, articles, synopsis, etc. which when created is put up on the software toolbar at/from the administrator or the instructor's interface/s of the software with the pre-assigned time, duration and date of the assessment exercise, and then set live/opened up for the students to attempt on this collaborative platform.

The software provides another interface for end users/students, wherein they receive the assigned assessment forms and the assessment exercise, the students submits the attempted or not attempted exercise through this individualized interface, which forms another part of the assessment data. The assessment data thus collected forms the part of the larger database, stored on the internally connected hardware/server. The inventions critical core also comprises of an internal circuit in cases/situations where questions, quizzes and the likes are not attempted by the end/user or the students and/or answered incorrectly an automatic adaptive and responsive feedback for the instructors are generated, which shall be discussed in the next and final stage of automatic report generation. This setup is performed and processed by/on the assessment tool inherent to this invention and the collaborative platform called as Qppt. The assessment tool contains multiple features namely; assessment form preparation, assessment exercise preparation, ensuring alignment of the LO's with the exercise preparation. Course coverage is linked with time, LO and word content, once the assessment is complete and the answer sheets are submitted, this stage gets over.

This is the end of assessment stage. The fourth and the final stage of this invention is the essence of this patent, wherein the data or the statistics that gets collected "automatically" on the hardware which is linked with the internal setup of the institution through internal servers, gets processed in defined manners or maybe defined as per customization for targeted set of stakeholders or audiences. The focus of this patent and this stage in particular is on the concept of automation of report generation linked with the customized data storage hardware system. In this invention involving a series of processes, there are presently following points of planting, wherein the hardware interlinked with software is to be controlled, commanded and can be rectified and/or rebooted: -

1. First and foremost at the University level, wherein the software is implanted on the prescribed minimum configured hardware/system.

2. Second level is at the campuses operating underneath the university, which can be within the periphery/ vicinity of the parent university or otherwise.

3. Third level is at various colleges operating in the specified campuses which are basically colleges providing various specialized degrees, diploma's, certificates and the like in the relevant field of study, for an example College of Architecture would provide course and degrees relevant to the field of architecture.

4. Fourth level is at various departments within the colleges, like department of science, in that, department of computer science, department of Information Technology, Department of Nano technology and the like.

5. Fifth level is at various the overall monitoring interfaces, to be controlled and used by specified/pre-defined users or operators.

Further to the above, there are following interfaces, in this process, essentially involving all the stakeholders, namely;

1. President Interface

2. Dean Interface

3. Administrator Interface

4. Subject Matter Expert Interface 5. Lecturer Interface

6. Student Interface

There are following reports that gets generated "automatically" at the following interfaces and many of which are real-time on the basis of calculating or processing the data on defined algorithms and apart from the reports mentioned herein below, the software provides an automatic adaptive feedback to the students and automatic responsive feedback to the lecturers and parents (this will be discussed at a later stage) :-

1. At the president or the patron's level

(a) An aggregated and overall functioning of the university segmented into campuses, as illustrated by Fig. 13, wherein campuses within a parent university, are compared as to the 1301 course coverage, this percentage showcases the depth and extent to which the courses/lectures has been delivered vis-a-vis as intended while conceiving , 1302 course learning outcome as shown herein are summation of those outcomes which has been achieved versus as benchmarked, for an example a particular skill or knowledge that should have been learned/acquired by the learner after completion of a particular learning module, this is represented here in terms of percentage achieved 1303 student learning effectiveness is the summation of learners extent of learning gauged on the grounds of assessments(grading, marks and the likes achieved) which were linked with the variables as mentioned herein above , 1304 Attendance, show cases the summation of turnout of lecturers and students per class, lecture, college and campus . There is a comparative report 1305 of all the campus at the end of Fig 13, which depicts in percentage terms the overall effectiveness of the campus composed of the above parameters like CLO, SLE, Course Coverage and Attendance and alerts the president in real time with highlighting and showcasing the precise issue effecting education learning and teaching. An aggregated report of course or the program Learning Objectives/Goal (sub-divide into various Learning Objectives/Goals per subject, per session, per image) and student learning effectiveness, missed Learning Objectives/Goals, coupled with detailed attendance, which gets further segregated including but not limiting in any which way into the following reports, namely :- (a) Campus Effectiveness, as illustrated by Fig.14, is an exemplary report giving a president view of a Campus 1 composed of 1401 four colleges and their 1402 overall effectiveness based on SLE, CLO and Course Coverage and a 1403 comparative graph in percentage terms showcasing precise effectiveness of learning and teaching with points of lacking.

(b) College Effectiveness, as illustrated by Fig.15, shows an exemplary president view of the college performance composed of individual/segmented 1501 departmental performance on the variables of CLO, SLE and Attendance and further a 1502 comparative analysis of departments in percentage terms precisely showing learning and teaching progress and deficiencies.

(c) Department Effectiveness, as illustrated by Fig.16 depicts an exemplary patron's view of the departmental progress of 1601 departments 1-4, on the same variables of SLE, CLO and Attendance, a summation of all of these variables shows an 1602 overall performance of all the departments within a college in terms of percentage highlighting the low percentages if any.

(d) Program Effectiveness, as illustrated by Fig. 17, depicts an exemplary departmental view of the program effectiveness from the president' s point of view on the same variable of attendance as mentioned above, except that there are 1701 LO and 1702 SLO instead of CLO and SLE, essentially showcasing the summation of all the courses in a particular campus, for example campus 1, college 1 and department 1. Herein the courses may vary depending upon the subjects opted, for an example different courses essentially meaning different and segmented specialization. Herein the report shows in 1703 serial number 2, in course 2, in the attendance row a 1704 percentage of 41 %, this precisely means a below 50 % mark, essentially meaning a low turn -out , that is to say a precise information data generated automatically with ease becomes readily available and can be acted upon within time.

(e) Course Effectiveness as illustrated by Fig. 18, is an exemplary report, reporting the

Course effectiveness of Particular course, herein course 1 as offered in a university under a particular program and further under a particular specialization, is a combination of the 1801 Course 1 delivered in different sections. The variables of 1802 LO and SLO depicts the objectives in the form of outcomes as defined at the structuring stage were achieved or not and if yes till what percentage. This is coupled with the attendance as to depict the turn out. (f) Lecturer Teaching Effectiveness as illustrated by Fig.19, shows an exemplary reporting of the lecturer performance (for the president and may be used in other fields as desired) in 1901 four different sections and on four different variables based on the variables of Course coverage, course learning outcome and student learning effectiveness and attendance. The essence here complete and precise mapping of the content taught, depth reached, time taken, outcomes achieved and student's grasp based on the grading' s on the assessments which are inherently linked with the must have LO, Tag's and Word Content/Verb. The reporting that gets generated automatically based on the mechanism as described above in the invention/process flow, shows the precise information at all levels of teaching and learning, it is real-time, thereby ensuring feature of "action and reaction" time for the university, and the for all the stakeholders concerned. For an example in 1902 serial number 2, row 2, the course coverage is 85%, course learning outcome is 75% , attendance is 81%, however the 1903 student learning effectiveness is low at 45 %, that is , this reports/information gets generated at intervals after completion of the defined course, and completion of assessments based on the same ( first quiz, mid-term and the like), which provides ample information and time to rectify any issues during the period of program rather than following the traditional subjective monitoring system which leaves no room for improvement, due to lack of proper monitoring, precise information and proactive time.

(g) Student Learning Effectiveness as illustrated by Fig. 20, depicts an exemplary reporting of 2001 Students coded CS-120, CS-203, CS-201 and CS-202, on the variables of attendance and precise monitored information ( linked with RFID), as to the time of entrance for the class, time of actual exit from the class, exam results and student learning effectiveness in terms of percentage. The figure depicts the student learning effectiveness, the 2002 course 2 shows lower level, precisely below the 50 % mark, depicting the grading achieved by student CS-203 for the course 2 is very low, since the graph showing a lower percentage is composed of attendance, exam results and student learning effectiveness which are low as well.

(h) Comparative reports of teacher effectiveness and student learning, individual students/end users aggregated comparative reports of courses, colleges and/or universities. 2. At the Dean and Administrator Level: -

(a) Precise reporting of the student learning and lecture teaching effectiveness of individualized students, classrooms, programs and department, as illustrated in the exemplary figure 19 and in Fig. 20 and Fig.21;

(b) Reports of Lecturer performance, attendance, student performance and their attendance as illustrated in Fig.19 and Fig.22;

(c) Report showing precise use of Learning Objectives/Goal usage in assessment exercise preparation;

(d) Reports showing further assessment requirement for students or any amendment in lecturer delivery output, this will be in form of the feedbacks via automatic e-mails and/or SMS.

(e) Report of actual delivery time vis-a-vis proposed/expected time, including pause time, idle time, and Learning Objectives/Goal coverage and tagged verb coverage, as illustrated in the exemplary Fig.19.

(f) Report of any LO and tagging being missed during teaching or delivery of lecture.

(g) Assessment, automatic recommendations, commentaries, explanation reports of the students and to the parents, after the report analysis generation.

3. At the Instructor Level

(a) Report of actual course coverage by the instructor, depth, etc. as illustrated in the exemplary Fig. 21 and Fig.22;

(b) Student performance report including but not limited to individualized and aggregate classroom assessment reports, warning reports, further assessment reports, if any, as illustrated in Fig.22;

(c) As illustrated in Fig. 22, the attendance reports of the students in a particular session, course, program and the like. 4. At the Students Level

(a) Assessment report summary, assessment detail report, assessed questions and answers, as illustrated in Fig.20.

5. At the Parents Level

(a) Report of actual, precise and objectively assessed performance of their children, LO's achieved, percentage of course covered, percentage of grade scored/achieved.

(b) Report regarding further assessment requirement, explanations, recommendations, commentaries, if any. (Delivered via linked sms, e-mail or any other communication system)

The essence to these automatically generated reports is that they form the basis of the feature of mentioned above and known as "action and reaction" time, which precisely gets converted into automatic adaptive feedbacks to the students and automatic responsive feedback to the lecturers and parents, coupled with warning signals if any on real time.

The system performs various kinds of calculations which are done across goals and within goals, across categories, and their sub-divisions, including multi-levels of learners, including groups, sections, classrooms, departments, programs, peers, degrees, colleges, institutions, universities, geographic areas across multi units and levels learning, and so forth. The stakeholders such as accreditation bodies, policy makers, the department of education, parents, employers, employees, etc., may request access to these customized reports as required configuring or denying accreditation, grants, for recruiting bodies, employers, etc. to induct that workforce who is skilled, i.e. to precisely get the skill aligned to the industrial requirements. The whole process is automated, precisely teaching, learning, assessment, reporting, all are done over the collaborative platform which considerably eases the time consuming work, checks consistency and ensures reliability.

Claims

1. A system and method of educational content delivery, objective evaluation based on course learning outcomes and assessment of lecturer teaching effectiveness, the system comprising of :

Programmed software interlinked with the digital signal processor and data storehouse operating on a network-connected with internal servers or LAN or WAN and consisting of pre-defined learning objectives, tagged add-ons, word content, attendance measurement and automatic video capturing device and assessment exercise preparation;

• A content feeding tool connected to the input interface of the software;

• An analysis tool interconnected with the main statistics or data collection Centre;

• A guidelines apparatus interconnected with the statistics or data collection Centre;

• A report generator apparatus interconnected with the main data collection Centre;

• An output apparatus connected to the output interface of the data Centre and the software.

A course creator module accessible by the creator or the SME of the educational institute, which could be either in a classroom setting or online, the course creation interface configured with functionalities for the course creator to generate and tag learning objectives or course learning outcome based on creator's or SME's on own judgment and/or in collaboration with accreditation guidelines; the user interface or the interactive platform is further configured to enable the instructor to assign weightage or percentage or the like to the questions/exercise generated based on the learning outcome.

Wherein an input interface will also be provided for an administrative control to and/or for observing, and amending the learning objectives and interactions with the learning assessment material, learning outcomes, course depth and assessment configuration tools, learning and assessment reports on real-time.

Wherein the guideline apparatus performs checks on the course content delivery, the alignment between learning objectives and the assessment exercise, course learning outcome, student learning effectiveness, on time warning creation and an overall automatic real-time working of the software.

Wherein the report generator automatically generates a number of reports, one of them by linking the apparatus for the assessment data collection centre with the standard grading based on the learning objectives to ensure and monitor actual and focused leanings achieved.

For one or more of the students who failed to achieve one or more of the learning outcomes, automatically suggest and provide individualized focused feedback and learning material and multiple ways to take re-assessment like submitting a report, articles, project and the like, essentially known as learning improvement plan personalized to the students reporting and requirements.

Submitting (may or may not automatically) a report to the various concerned accreditation bodies to show evidence of compliance of standards prescribed.

2. The system and method in claim 1 , is further provided with an inbuilt mechanism by way of tagging, to calculate and generate automatic reports on the difference between net spent time and the expected/estimated time per learning material in a complete non- obtrusive manner.

3. The system of claim 2, wherein the platform is further provided with the interface that receives requests for tagging of learning outcomes and thinly highlighting the word content as required.

4. The tagging according to claim 3 can be in any type of programming language and are embedded in the learning material.

5. The system in claim 1, wherein the reports generated automatically determines whether one or more and/or to what extent the learning outcomes have been achieved by determining by way of linking the pre-set grading with the learning outcomes.

6. The system of claiml, wherein the course creator or the SME and the instructor are not the same person, i.e. they are two different persons.

7. The system of claiml, wherein the instructor teaching style variance is accommodate upto 25% before any kind of red-flagging or alerting generation by a cautioning signal,

8. The system of claim 7, wherein the red-flagging is done on real-time at the system level, culminating into a cautionary e-mail, message, or the like, in case the student learning effectiveness is below the expected/intended and or must have level. This is done after the assessment is over and is shown primarily at two levels or from two points of view, i.e. at lecturer level and specialization level.

9. The system of claim 9, wherein the reports generated are on the number of analysis, interlinking a number of variables, created for a number of audiences, namely from the accreditation level, president level, to the administrator/dean level, to the lecturer level, and for the parents.

10. The system of reporting as claimed in claim 9, will be an individualized focused reporting as well as aggregate of individual assessments, of lecturer assessments based on time spent teaching, course learning outcome/s, course depth, attendances and the like, students assessments based on assessment exercises, attendance and the like.

11. The system of claim in claim 10, wherein the reports are generated and distributed, will identify areas of achieved and missed learning inter-connected to the pre-defined learning objectives.

12. The system of claim 7, wherein an analysis apparatus would also analyse, and the progress made in the improvement plan and generate report thereof.

13. The system in claim 1, wherein the learning assessments comprises of one or more tests, exams, quizzes, essays, papers, projects, mid-terms, end-term, labs, presentations, oral reports, homework, attendance, and class participation.

14. A system of precise electronic monitoring of the effectiveness in teaching and learning, the method comprising of;

(a) Providing a creator interface via an application server to allow users to specify the content, LO's, verbs and time.

(b) Providing an instructor interface to allow users to, instruct the learning content with the pre-defined variables, and stimulate the same on the interface during delivery.

(c) Providing an administrator/dean interface to allow users to prepare the assessment exercise, conduct the exercise and collect the data

(d) Automatically performing consistency checks to ensure alignment of learning objectives with the assessment exercise, by use of filtered taught learning materials. (e) Automatically calculating and reporting course learning outcome and student learning effectiveness in real-time with red flagging ensuring sufficient action and reaction time.

(f) Providing a series of customized reports for individualized and aggregated.

15. The system in claim 1 wherein a proactive assessment is done by the software automatically, for supporting, guiding and aiding the lecturer/s by an in-built mechanism of automatic filtration of the tagged and taught course content/s, also this filtration is precise and shows an hundred per cent accurate result/s ;

16. The system in claim 1, wherein this collaborative software provides for adaptive feedback to the students, by automatically filtering for the lecturer and administrator those course content/s and learning outcome/s which an end user/student has not attempted and/or answered incorrectly;

17. The system in claim 1, wherein this platform is supported by the database hardware collection center provides;

18. A method of instructing students, a method of delivering lectures, a method of structuring and tagging educational content, a method of assessment preparation, conducting, and report generation thereof, with adaptive and responsive feedback mechanism.

19. The system of claim 10, wherein the process is initiated, carried and culminated on/via the unique programmed software.

20. The system of claim 11 , wherein implementation is carried out on the unique software which is interlinked and/or embedded on the hardware and a Data processing system.

21. The system in claim 1, wherein the process involves the usage of "QSNAP" which is a pre-programmed hardware which gets triggered for short durations in a classroom environment automatically;

22. The system in claim 1, wherein the software has an "ippt" which is an interactive power point presentation window;

23. The system in claim 1, wherein the system provides for an "IDEA" interface which provides for an interactive and easy to use assessment generation and conducting mechanism within the "iiiQppt";

24. The system in claim 1 , wherein the process involves the automatic adaptive feedback on student learning effectiveness;

25. The system in Claim 1, wherein the mechanism involves the pre-programmed attendance calculating mechanism which works on the RFID system, enabled herein for ensuring precise attendance monitoring for students and lectures in a classroom setup.