Nikola I. Nikolov’s research while affiliated with ETH Zurich and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (2)


Fig. 1. Model of our recurrent neural network (RNN) learning agent. The agent consists of a writing module (left), which converts phonetic into graphemic sequences (P2G), and a the reading module (right), which converts a graphemic into a phonetic sequence (G2P). The two operations are executed sequentially, and if both operations are successful, the input and output phonemes are identical. This model can be exposed to standard, primer-based writing instruction as well as to LdSalike instruction (i.e., tolerating inventive spelling). The difference between the two methods lies in the correction scheme to the writing module. This can result in a differing input to the subsequent reading module (shown in green). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
Fig. 3. Development of performance metrics for writing task over the course of training. A) Full word accuracy of all five agents on training data. B) Full word accuracy on test data. C: Proportion of correct spellings and LdS-accepted spellings for regular and LdS agent on training data. D: Same plot for test data. The vertical bar after 125 epochs indicates the change in the learning regime for the LdS agents. Simulations were repeated five times and average performance is shown.
Fig. 4. Development of word accuracy on reading task over the course of training. A) Full word accuracy of all five agents on training data. B) Full word accuracy on test data.
Fig. A1. G2P module architecture. Time-unrolled architecture of the encoding-decoding bLSTM as shown in Fig. 1. Orange nodes indicate forward, green nodes backward LSTM cells. Black arrows represent data being fed into the receiving node, red arrows indicate a concatenation operation, the blue arrow indicates hidden state initialization and the green arrows indicate two fully connected layers used to map the decoder output to the output vocabulary. For details, please refer to the text.
A computational investigation of inventive spelling and the “Lesen durch Schreiben” method
  • Article
  • Full-text available

April 2022

·

122 Reads

·

3 Citations

Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence

Jannis Born

·

Nikola I. Nikolov

·

·

[...]

·

In primary schools, Lesen durch Schreiben (LdS; “reading through writing”, known internationally as inventive spelling) is a prevalent didactic method of reading and spelling instruction. In LdS, pupils learn writing through prolonged inventive spelling, meaning that only phonological but not orthographic spelling errors are corrected. Rigorous studies of the effectiveness of LdS are scarce and have delivered inconsistent results, casting doubt on the suitability of LdS for primary school instruction. Empirical investigations of writing acquisition methods are time-consuming, costly, and are plagued by methodological evaluation difficulties, such as separating method effects from other instruction-related variables. In this work, we developed a computational framework (based on recurrent neural networks) for reading and writing acquisition. This framework enables us to extract and systematically investigate some core principles of writing acquisition methods. Focusing on two German corpora, we compared the behavior of learning agents trained using the LdS regime against agents trained using a classical, primer-based regime. Experimental results revealed that our LdS agents performed significantly worse than our primer agents in writing tasks and, to a lesser extent, in reading tasks. Our results show that the stereotypical spelling mistakes of children exposed to LdS can be replicated with neural network models. These mistakes arise naturally during writing acquisition for all learning agents but are either suppressed or reinforced depending on the learning regime. We examined the learned, internal representations of both agents and found deviations in the LdS agent that may have induced the amplified confusion of similar phonemes. While we focused on two German corpora, similar results can be expected for alphabetic languages with similar graphene-phoneme regularities. In sum, LdS does not exhibit benefits over standard instruction in our simulations. However, we urge caution in drawing immediate conclusions for human learners. Instead, our work presents a modest step towards the construction of a computational framework for writing and reading instructional methods that may inspire future research.

Download

Citations (1)


... Auch in der Studie von Röhr-Sendlmeier et al. (2007) kann über eine vergleichende Wirksamkeitsanalyse zu den Methoden "Fibel", "Lesen durch Schreiben" und "Rechtschreibwerkstatt" kein empirischer Beweis für die Überlegenheit einer der Methoden gefunden werden. Die Analyse von Born et al. (2022) stellt aus methodischer Sicht eine Besonderheit dar, da der Einfluss verschiedener Vermittlungsmethoden auf die Lese-und Rechtschreibfähigkeiten dort über die Erstellung eines KI-basierten Lernmodells simuliert wird. Es zeigt sich eine Unterlegenheit der Vermittlungsmethode "Lesen durch Schreiben" hinsichtlich der Lernwirksamkeit in beiden Kompetenzbereichen. ...

Reference:

Zum Einfluss von Vermittlungsmethode, professionellem Wissen und Überzeugungen von Lehrkräften auf die Lese- und Rechtschreibleistung im schriftsprachlichen AnfangsunterrichtOn the influence of teaching method, professional knowledge and teachers’ beliefs on reading and spelling competence in early literacy lessons
A computational investigation of inventive spelling and the “Lesen durch Schreiben” method

Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence