200512F_CLTHE_Full

Portfolio of Evidences on
Demonstrating
C Programming Laboratories
Dr James Cunha Werner
2005
University of Manchester
Certificate for Learning and Teaching in High Education
Postgraduate course

Outcomes Evidences
1. Design and plan learning activities
for C Programming Laboratory
demonstration. 1. Diagram showing the relationship between data
modelling and implementation (3 cases).
2. Case 1: pointers implementation
3. Solution
4. Case 2: pointer’s loop implementation
5. Solution
6. Case 3: pointer of pointer implementation
7. Solution
8. Diagram of data modelling (structures).
9.Case 4: problem description
10.Solution
11. Diagram of algorithm implementation
12. Case 5: matrix problem description
13. Solution
2. Carry out support of learning
1. Diagram showing the relationship between data
modelling and implementation
14 and 15. Report from Imperial College
16.Tutor assessment from University of Manchester
17.Lab Supervisor assessment from University of
Manchester
3. Devise and apply appropriate
strategies and criteria for assessment
18. Computer assessment
19 to 21. manual assessment form
22. Workshop on assessment
23. Learning sets on dealing with student’s emotional
responses to assessment.
4. Monitor and critically evaluate own
professional practice and its impact on
the student experience
24. Book’s solution beyond student’s comprehension.
25. Support problem solution
26. pointer’s student solution
27. pointer’s loop student solution
28. pointers of pointers student solution
29. Student’s assessment
5. Perform teaching and academic
administration effectively
30. Supervision spreadsheet.
6. Provide support to students on
academic matters

7. Develop personal and professional
coping strategies
modelling and implementation
8. Reflect on own personal and
professional practice and
development 31 to 33. Career development.
34 and 35. Professional experience in industry.
36 to 41. Professional experience in academia.
9. Overview of mind maps to design
learning activities (Project-based
developing learning and teaching
module). 42. Mind map training at Univ. of Manchester.
43. Mind map for my talk.
44. From mind map to slides.
45. Slides.
46. Evaluation 2 months later.
47. References about mind maps.
10. Show how own practice with
regard to the above outcomes is
underpinned by specific proof values
48. First material sent to my tutor.
49. Successful experiences.
50. Learning agreement.
51. Peer assessment about my portfolio.

Introduction
This document presents a critical evaluation and discussion of my abilities as
learning process facilitator for undergraduate students, to obtain the
Certificate of Learning and Training in High Education. Every requirement was
fulfilled with evidences obtained teaching C programming Laboratory in
undergraduate courses at University of Manchester and Imperial College.
C programming laboratory is a very demanding task, because students are
agents in learning process, and demonstrators only have to provide support
and guidance that allows them achieve their goals without tell the answers.
Chapter 1 describes the design and plan of learning activities through different
pedagogical scenarios. Chapter 2 describes how I carried out support for
learning activities based in a taxonomy of situations.
Feedback was provided through assessment (Chapter 3), which provide me
with information to evaluate my own professional practice (Chapter 4) and
management (Chapter 5).
Underpinning all this work, there are the concern about student support on
academic matter (Chapter 6) and more general coping strategies (Chapter 7).
This holistic point of view allowed me reflect on my own personal and
professional practice and development (Chapter 8) and how it underpinned
my practice (Chapter 10).
Chapter 9 describes the use of mind maps to support design and plan of
learning activities, a proposal to be developed during the next year.

1. Design and plan learning activities for C Programming
Laboratory demonstration.
Design and plan a learning activity requires from lecturers/demonstrators the
knowledge of the following issues:
1. What are the major models of learning process to understand how people
acquire skills.
Select a winner teaching strategy requires understand how people assimilate
new information, and change their behaviour (learn). There are 3 major
learning theories: Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism.
Behaviorism uses conditioning to achieve learned responses. The repetition
of stimula/response automatises the behaviour. Learning is accomplished
when a proper response is demonstrated following the presentation of a
specific environmental stimulus[1]
.
Thorndike [1]
introduced 3 laws to explain his point of view:
• Law of exercise: Repetition of exercise increases the probability of correct
response. <with practice, the associations are strengthened or weakened
and the appropriate behaviour is emitted more reliably>.
• Law of effect: A satisfying state of affairs following the response
strengthens the connection between the stimulus and the behaviour,
whereas an annoying state weakens the connection. <associations are
made only when the behaviour is connected with a reinforcing
consequence>.
• Law of transfer: The conditioned behaviour will only occur under stimulus
conditions similar to those in which the behaviour was initially learned.

Pavlov pointed out that reflex actions (involuntary) were trained so that the
reflexes can be elicited by a stimulus other than that which naturally elicits
them. Pavlov showed that when a conditioned stimulus is paired with another
neutral stimulus, the second stimulus can also become conditioned.
Cognitivism is based in the thought process behind the behaviour. In cognitive
theories, knowledge is viewed as symbolic mental constructs in the learner's
mind, and the learning process is the means by which these symbolic
representations are committed to memory. Changes in behaviour are
observed as indication of what is going on in learner's head[2]
.
Piaget studied how a child comes to know his or her world. He is renowned
for constructing a highly influential model of child development and learning.
Piaget's theory is based on the idea that the developing child builds cognitive
structures--in other words, mental "maps," schemes, or networked concepts
for understanding and responding to physical experiences within his or her
environment. Piaget further attested that a child's cognitive structure
increases in sophistication with development, moving from a few innate
reflexes such as crying and sucking to highly complex mental activities.
Vygotsky’s concepts of the social formation of the mind and the Zone of
Proximal Development add much to our understanding of human
development. The social cognition learning model asserts that culture is the
prime determinant of individual development. Humans are the only species to
have created culture, and every human child develops in the context of a
culture. Therefore, a child's learning development is affected in ways large
and small by the culture--including the culture of family environment--in which
he or she is enmeshed.

Construtivism is based in the conception of learning. Von Glasersfeld[3]
argues that: "From the constructivist perspective, learning is not a stimulus-
response phenomenon. It requires self-regulation and the building of
conceptual structures through reflection and abstraction" (p.14). Fosnot [4]
adds that "Rather than behaviours or skills as the goal of instruction, concept
development and deep understanding are the foci (...) (p.10). For educators,
the challenge is to be able to build a hypothetical model of the conceptual
worlds of students since these worlds could be very different from what is
intended by the educator [5],[6]
.
In this paradigm, learning emphasizes the process and not the product. How
one arrives at a particular answer, and not the retrieval of an 'objectively true
solution', is what is important. Learning is a process of constructing
meaningful representations, of making sense of one's experiential world. In
this process, students' errors are seen in a positive light and as a means of
gaining insight into how they are organizing their experiential world. The
notion of doing something 'right' or 'correctly' is to do something that fits with
"an order one has established oneself"[7]
. This perspective is consistent with
the constructivist tendency to privilege multiple truths, representations,
perspectives and realities.
Ertmer[8]
make a comparative study of all three theories[9]
.
2. What are the requirements students will face after the learning process, or,
what the learning process is intended for.
Physicists are entitle to work teaching at Universities and High Schools, or
developing complex system models for industries, banks, and engineering

companies. Physics course teaches students how to develop these models
and use it for optimisation and understanding of nature processes.
Models are mathematical relations between variables of the process and
performance index are defined based in economic issues. System
optimisation cares to make the system as profitable as possible.
The system under study will be company’s activity process. If working for a
transport company it could be a transport system (such as underground or
busses) and the goal will be increase the number of passengers transported
during the day with lower costs and time travel. Working for sugar and alcohol
companies, it could be a fermentation process optimisation through changes
in the sugar feed rate. Steel companies demand highly efficient production
recipes and process operations to increase steel production with costs
reduction, due third world competitive market.
These models represent reality abstracting exogenous factors (considered as
perturbations) and allow the physicist study system characteristics and
forecast behaviours and properties to find the most economic procedure.
Unfortunately, due the complexity of mathematical models most of them (if not
all) do not have an analytical solution, e.g. a solution can be written as a
mathematical equation. Most of them, the physicist can not develop
experiments in the real process, and the model provide all necessary
information for development of a system simulator.
To overcome these difficulties, computer programming uses numerical
methods to solve models that do not have analytical solution and provide
physicists with the solution they need to perform their job.

Most of simulation systems will later be used as decision support and
operators training support.
3. Professional requirements and assessments.
The assessment of a model and its computational implementation are defined
by its stability, robustness and accuracy.
Results accuracy is affected by hypothesis mistakes and computer program
errors. Hypothesis can be checked against data from the process, to evaluate
its accuracy.
However, computer program errors are much more difficult to be found. There
are trivial mistakes such as syntax and language requirements that most of
time are found by the compiler. The compiler is the tool that converts the
program language (understand by humans) into executable commands
(understand by computers).
When the error came from logic, it is more difficult find out. The error could be
hiding in a place of code not executed because the test set does not cover all
the possible conditions the software will have to face with, or the difference
introduced by the error is not representative in comparison with other result
components.
In synthesis, students that have attended Computer programming course
must be able to perform rational thinking and reduce complex problems
models to a limited set of elementary tasks through analysis and synthesis
that can be coded in a language to be executed by the computer with
accuracy.

These skills are not able to be performed using any magic rules or recipes.
There are methodologies that help to perform the process, representing
knowledge and relationships, but the final result is programmer’s creation.
The practical fulfilment of these requirements is realised by construtivism
approach. Learning is not a stimulus-response phenomenon. It is the
construction of a meaningful solution based in student's hypothetical model of
the conceptual worlds, ruled by syntax and logic of programming language.
Learn the necessary information and be able to perform the activity demands
a very practical approach. Students attending a lecture most of the time are
driven by the lecturer.
Karen Anderson[10]
analysed lectures structure at MIT physics course and
their change to Technology Enabled Active Learning, or TEAL, a student
centred approach where lectures became more practical.
It is almost impossible develop a lecture where students are agent of the
process.
It would be a disaster teach programming language using lectures approach
only because there are infinite ways to solve the same problem under a
creative centred approach. Each approach has positive and negative points
and are valid as far they can produce the correct solution.
It is not only the algorithm they are using to solve the problem. It is how they
write the algorithm using computer language. For example, they could use
different types of loops to perform the task. All of them are correct, but
showing different reasoning.
They have to develop the ability to use the correct code structure and logical
reasoning from a problem description in English. The code must be clear to

allow any physicist to make maintenances and changes to reuse the software
in another condition, saving money and efforts. The way to drive students
develop these skills is through laboratories classes, using a construtivism
approach.
There are two different approaches I have work with: lectures with
laboratories at University of Manchester and only laboratories at Imperial
College.
Both courses follow the same synopses, but they differ in the way theory and
practice is delivered. These differences are crucial in the laboratory
demonstration and students learning process besides the total number of
hours and the issue are the same.
Lectures+Lab adopted at Manchester follows the conventional course
structure. The theory was covered and one or more examples are described
in class. Laboratory consists in a different problem using pieces of the
example and something more the student have to develop by themselves.
The important point is the need of a complete understanding of the example,
and the theory behind it to perform the task.
This perspective is consistent with the constructivist tendency to privilege
multiple truths, representations, perspectives and realities to perform the task
and acquire learn in the process.
Laboratory only approach adopted at Imperial College is much more
demanding for students. This is a 100% student-centred learning. Students
receive a theory description divided in modules and a series of tasks related
with each theory module.

Students need to read the theory and establish a reasoning by themselves to
solve the tasks. They have to be active learners, because they do not have
the lecturer experience support during the class and the example to be
adapted to solve the problem.
This approach requires trivial problems at beginning to develop the basis for a
more complex reasoning. Another important point is the tasks must use
previous tasks to be solved. For example, one task was simple pendulum,
coupled pendulum model, variable length pendulum, and the final project was
the study of chaotic behaviour of coupled pendulum when the length of the
pendulum is changed.
Both approaches can be represented in Kolb's learning cycle (Fig. 1). Lab
only approach goes from concrete experience to abstract concept, while
lectures +lab in opposite direction. However, in both cases the agent of
learning process is the student and the laboratory demonstration was defined
to overcome difficulties and provide the means for a consistent learning
process.
In both scenarios, demonstration in the laboratory requires from the
demonstrator deep understanding of the problem and all possible solutions.
He/she must be able to look at the screen and see the problem at once, and
provide support.
Demonstration process occurs following always the same protocol. At the
beginning students call the demonstrator, and ask “why the software is not
working?”. Only later in the course, the student calls and asks some technical
aspect of logic or syntax and discusses implementation alternatives.

Fig 1. The learning process in programming laboratory.
The demonstrator must look the software and identify the problem. Them,
without solve the problem, the demonstrator has to ask questions about the
theory that are not clear and the lack of understanding that are the cause for
the mistake. Sometimes, just tell the student about the method to acquire
information about the problem is enough to allow them find the solution by
themselves.
This interactive process is very demanding because the demonstrator can not
tell the answer, but drive the student in the solution direction. If the
demonstrator just tells the problem solution, the student will not acquire the
reasoning to solve the problem, and will have deeper and deeper problems
every week due the lack of previous structures.
To support in this process, the demonstrator have to be prepared to point the
solution in a higher level of abstraction that the student is doing. It means the
demonstrator will explain WHAT must be done and not HOW it needs to be
Concrete
experience
DOING
Reflective
observation
REFLECTING
Abstract conceptualisation
THINKING/GENERALIS
ING
Active
experimentation
PLANNING

implemented. Doing this, the student is in charge of the learning process
using their creativity to implement their solution.
I use to have a schema diagram showing in high level the solution and the
relationship with previous and related theory to support my explanations. This
is a very good way to reduce the time to answer a question and avoid give too
much information (more they discovered by themselves, better!). It is
important to forecast what will be students questions to prepare the diagrams,
and make them clean.
Evidence #1 shows the diagram for bubble sort class. The problem asks to
sort a series of numbers using a technique that looks like a bobble going up in
the glass of liquid. Take the first number, compare with the second and swap
if the first is bigger. Then, take the second number, compare with the third and
swap if the second is bigger. Repeat the process until the end of the list.
After this, the last number is the greater of all. Repeating the same process
again until the before last, you will have the penultimate number, and so on.
The problem requires the student develop 3 solutions using arrays of numbers
(evidence #2 and #3), pointers (evidences #4 and #5), and pointers of
pointers (evidences #6 and #7).
The schema shows the three different approaches and how to represent
differences between the solutions, without show the solution itself.
The main goal of this module is to show how different representations (arrays,
pointers, and pointers of pointers) can be used to deal with large amounts of
data. It contains the data modelling, algorithmic implementation, and its
relationship.

Evidence #8 shows the diagram for structures. Structures are a very important
concept, because it will be the foundations to object oriented programming.
Objects can use structures that bound its constituents and methods to access
the data, which define a class.
The diagram shows blocks with components inside, and its relation with
screen output, mathematical operations, and organisation in memory. The
ideas behind are to show concept of block structure to represent data.
Problem description (evidence #9) and solution (evidence #10) allow to define
the strategy I should use to draw the diagrams that will support my
demonstration.
It is interesting that from implementation complexity point of view, this
laboratory is trivial when compared with the previous one (bubble sort).
However, there are deep theoretical implications of structures that will be
studied in another programming course about classes and C++ frameworks
(optional course).
Evidence #11 was the course final project. For some reason, during the
lecturers course evaluation meeting, there were complains about the difficulty
level of the laboratory problems. As consequence, the final project was to
obtain the inverse 3x3 matrix, and multiply by the original matrix and obtain
the identity.
I suggested a more interesting problem. The solution of a coupled first order
differential equation system by Runge Kutta Method using structures to store
data and pointers to functions to access each coupled differential equation.
My suggestion was not accepted, and we went to the matrix problem. There
was 2 weeks to solve the problem, but the students have done it by the end of

the first day (evidences 12 describe the problem and evidence 13 the
solution).
The course could be improved if a logic representation of the algorithms
(flowchart) could be introduced to support a deep understanding and concept
representation (main concerns in constructivism school).
2. Carry out support of learning
Programming Computers at University of Manchester was organised in
lectures followed by laboratory sections. Each laboratory has 125 students
and 5 demonstrators. Demonstrators can attend any student that requires
help.
Imperial College adopted the only laboratory approach, and each
demonstrator carry on 10 students. I will show my ability to carry out support
of learning through a taxonomy of situations when students require help for
both scenarios and describe what course of action I have adopted:
a. Trivial question due lack of knowledge, not described in the lectures notes:
this is the case where the course fails to provide some basic information. Most
of the cases are trivial links between the computer, operating system and the
program itself. I believe it happens because it is very difficult to describe, but
trivial to show in practice. Another source of missing information are
knowledge so trivial and part of the common jargon of experts, that lecturers
and material writers forget to explain.
One very common question is how the program works in the computer. If the
demonstrator answer “the computer runs the program”, will be meaningless
for the student.

The students do not have an idea that computers are sequential machines,
which means, the computer takes one instruction from the program, execute
it, and them takes next, execute it, and so on. But, where is the first
instruction?
The program structure corroborates to make thinks difficult. It contains first
include libraries, context definition, global variables, prototypes, and only them
the main function which is the entry point for the program.
Evidences #3, #5, #7, #10, and #13 contains source codes. It is difficult find
the main function.
The best approach for these situations is to show in the student’s draft what is
going on. To answer the above problem, I use to say the student that “you are
the computer. You are fast, but stupid. You cannot think, you just perform
each task after another.
What do you want to do? “
The student will answer “I do not know!”.
This is the answer I need to point how his program works: “Right, because
you do not know where is your program’s first command!” Them I will show in
the student’s draft the main function, and I will tell them that this is the entry
point and he will have to do each command sequentially. Operating system
loads users programs and points the computer for the first command inside
the main function.
“Now, what do you have to do?”
Them the student goes in the main function and starts describing each
command of the program and what actions and consequence it generates in
the context.

This approach allows students establish a link between his mental structures,
the program, the context and the computer system (hardware + operating
system). Students ask how the program works, but he really wants to know
where is the first instruction and what happens next to follow the logic
implemented in the algorithm. There will be a comparison between student's
cognitive structure and realisation of it in the computer's program.
Divergences will result in program's changes or cognitive structure adaptation
(learning from experience) to achieve the goals.
b. Trivial question due lack of knowledge, described in the text: sometimes
students do not read the text.
We could think the student is lazy, but this is not the case. Lazy students do
not ask questions. Actually, there are not lazy students. There are not
motivated students, unless they have some personal problems interfering the
learning process.
The problem with questions about thinks that are in the text is because the
student did not understand how the information is organised in the text.
In this case, instead answer, demonstrator should talk about how the text was
written and how the information is organised and where look for the answer.
For example, each command must follow language syntax. Students use to
ask how to repeat some command several times. This is a command of loop
type. They can use FOR, WHILE, or DO … WHILE.
This question could be answered explaining that the text is organised in
different types of structures and commands. If you want to describe data,
there are lectures notes 1,2, and 3. If you want to perform a loop, e.g. repeat
the same command several times, they have to look at lecture note 6. Them, I

pointed the student to the piece of text which describes all the loop
commands, and not the one they have to use because I want the student
have to decide what is the best solution for his problem.
Students will have to establish a connection between their cognitive structures
and different loop commands. This commands map all primitive cognitive
structures that deal with command's loops.
Another very frequent question are referring with information provided in the
problem text. They have to perform rational thinking and reduce complex
problems models to a limited set of elementary tasks, which means, they have
to read the problem text (jargon calls it “spec”) and write a piece of code that
performs the task exactly as described.
The first problem in this case is related with English (or any other language)
structure. There are prepositions, adverbs, etc that do not corroborate in the
program coding process. Only subjects and verbs carry actions that can be
coded in the program.
Another point is how to convert “read up to 1000 numbers” in a series of
commands. You can read from keyboard or file, and store it in arrays or
dynamic allocated memory referenced as pointers.
There is an abstraction and modelling process in program design. The
demonstrator must make very clear these points, because any difference
between spec and code results are mistakes, sometimes with terrible
consequences if the software is controlling an underground or a steel
production process.

c. implementation questions: these are very interesting questions and
students only achieve this level by the middle to the end of the course. Here
the demonstrator is able to give more than answers, but his own experience
as well. It is more related with how to perform the task and its efficiency.
For example, why use DO…WHILE instead WHILE…DO? The difference is
the first case is used always you have at least one element to perform the
loop, and the second is used when you can have no element at all.
Another case is differences between FOR and WHILE loops. The first
contains an index, which varies sequentially and have to run from the first until
the last (break the loops is not elegant in structured programming). The
second case, repetition process could be more complex and flexible using
events or states to control the loop.
One example of code optimisation is in evidence #1 problem. You do not
need to cover all string every time, because the last n elements are already
sorted. If you do it, will make no difference in the result but it will take longer.
d. unexpected problems and implementations: these are very rare questions
and problems.
For example, there is a function called swap available in the compiler libraries.
The student was developing a function and called it swap as well, but with
different parameters from the one in the compiler’s library.
When the student call the function he gave the parameters type from swap
function in the library.
This is a very interesting problem because the student was not running his
code, and any change done in it makes no difference.

Usually, the solution for these problems is to use old debug techniques, like
write the values in the screen during program execution. This allows the
student (and the demonstrator!) to understand what is going on.
These 4 types of situations occur in both scenarios of lectures and labs/ labs
only. Students start only with type “a” questions, after evolve to “b”, and so on.
The difference between both scenarios is the timing necessary to achieve
more complex levels. I believe the students which only laboratory course
achieve a level of understanding faster them students with lab and lectures.
This is really a paradox. Students with less information are able to develop
faster.
Maybe the reason is student lab-only has to understand the text organisation
from the beginning, and maybe this is the fundamental difference between
both approaches. They have to acquire a knowledge of the text organisation
that allow them navigate in the document and find the necessary information
faster them the other students.
Probably students with lectures do not read the texts with the same attention
from the beginning, and this could result in longer development.
Evidences that I am able to carry out support of learning are my good
performance teaching at Imperial College lab-only approach (Evidence #14)
and lecture+lab at University of Manchester (Evidences #15, #16, and #17).
These experiences provided me with practical skills, and have I been provided
with theory bases by this postgraduate course.

3. Devise and apply appropriate strategies and criteria for
assessment
Understand assessment stress demands understand students’ context. Most
students have education loan or are spending considerable amount of family’s
resources in their education. They are facing adulthood transition, and they
are not sure about their own capabilities.
Under this context, for them fail in one examination could means fail as
individual. High marks represent a pay back for their families, increase in their
self-esteem, and develop confidence.
By the other side, assessment is also a society's guarantee that when the
students become a professional he will not kill someone due his (or his
teachers') incompetence. I have been in several accident evaluation and
recovery due software implementation, and the causes sometimes are sensor
failure due environmental conditions, and regretfully, sometimes are software
implementation. Hazard operation evaluation could prevent most accidents, it
is a mandatory step in the implementation of any software (such as
underground or steel production), but accidents still happening.
Methods of Assessment [11]
from Constructivism point of view are the idea that
learning is an active process of building meaning for oneself. Thus, students
fit new ideas into their already existing conceptual frameworks. Constructivists
believe that the learners' preconceptions and ideas about science are critical
in shaping new understanding of scientific concepts. Assessment based on
constructivist theory must link the three related issues of student prior
knowledge (and misconceptions), student learning styles (and multiple
abilities), and teaching for depth of understanding rather than for breadth of

coverage. Meaningful assessment involves examining the learner's entire
conceptual network, not just focusing on discreet facts and principles. To
overcome these difficulties assessment can be easier done since some
ground rules are established between who assess and the students.
a. Criteria
It is fundamental importance describe what will be required from them when
working as physicists. What type of software they will have to develop and
what type of application defines the role programming will have in their life.
Describing how they will be evaluate, based in their professional demands,
helps them to study and be better prepared to compete in the market.
Evidence #18 shows some list of criteria that will be required at Manchester,
and it is a very good reference. It shows the importance of test beds, style,
and documentation. The conventional forms for evaluation shows the criteria
in the weight on top of it (evidences #19, #20, and #21).
b. Performance index
Assessment deals with objective and subjective evaluation. At Imperial
College, 20% mark comes from student participation in laboratory and 80%
from final project. At Manchester, every week the student accumulates points
and the final project represents 20%.
Clear definition about how marks are given is important to develop
management skills. They attend several courses, with several tasks, and they
have to prioritise their time according with results importance and weight. It is
another important skill, because deliver in time is professional requirement.

In synthesis, performance index will define how much time and effort the
student will spend in each task, and should take in account professional
requirements.
c. Recovery from crashes
Learn how to deal with stress is very important. Some times stress makes
students fail.
An example is Olympic Games. Every competitor has usually only one chance
in life to get a gold medal. What if in the competition day he is sick, or not in
his best shape? It is over.
Life usually is not so rigid. You can delay or change things due exogenous
events. This is contingency management, and is another important
management skill students have to acquire to keep themselves in the safe
side.
It is already taking in account when defining the performance index. If the
project represents 20% and the students have a problem in the project week,
they will be able to recover with only week tasks evaluation. However, if there
is only a final exam, 100% of mark, there is nothing to do.
The means to perform the evaluation can be done by marks of the project
(adopted at Imperial College) or by an evaluation software (adopted at
University of Manchester).
The problems with demonstrators marking are:
a. Each demonstrator give different amount of points for the same work.

b. Takes long time marking, and demonstrators are only part time
academics. They have their research to perform.
c. The demonstrator becomes a hangman. This could make students
afraid to make questions and show “they are not good enough”.
Under these circumstances, the introduction of CourseMark software is a very
interesting approach Manchester adopted.
First of all, student can be evaluate every week, which reduces the stress
about final exams. Second, criteria are clearly defined, and are the same for
all of them.
The most important, make demonstrators and lecturers facilitators in the
learning process. Students are agents in the learning process. The National
Committee into Higher Education in 1997 (the Dearing Report) does not refer
to "lecturers" but to "facilitators of student learning".
We are there to help them overcome CourseMark. This is an incredible step
forward.
Another interesting result is plagiarism control. The software is able to cross
students solutions and match any plagiarism. Students knew the software
does this control, and every week only 6 students over 120 made plagiarism.
Evidence #22 contains a learning set about assessment, and evidence #23 a
learning set about dealing with student’s emotional responses to assessment.
4. Monitor and critically evaluate own professional practice
and its impact on the student experience

It is easy to evaluate my own practice in laboratory, because even with 120
students, there are less them 3 cases every week that requires special
attention. Some students are more than once under “observation”.
The strategy I use to adopt is to go and start asking questions about what
they are doing like if I have “nothing to do”. This is very easy, and students do
not feel intimidated. Indeed, if things are not going as planned, I am able to
help them without they know, offering relevant information when appropriate.
Evidence #24 shows one female Chinese student case trying to solve bubble
sort copying a solution from a book. The problem was the solution uses
several pointers and concepts she didn’t have yet in class.
She was very confused not only with the problem, but with the theory and
syntax as well.
I gave her an overview, and we abandoned the book solution and she started
solving the problem with my supervision, explaining all the doubts she had.
She was doing thinks based in questions I was asking her (evidence #25).
Evaluation of my work comes in the next weeks, when she was able to solve
all problems using pointers (evidence #26 and #27), and the challenge
problem using pointers of pointers (evidence #28). Her mark was excellent at
CourseMark (evidence #29).
My approach allow me monitor and critically evaluate my professional practice
because I am able to:
a. Diagnostic learning problems with short notice, and adopt an effective
course of action.
b. Develop a contingency strategy to deal with the problem.

c. Help the student to be agent in the solution of their problems without
take the control, developing their self confidence to deal with
unexpected occurrences.
d. Evaluate the learning process through next week problems and
performance.
e. Be facilitator in the learning process.
This case happened every week, and it is a rewarding experience for lecturers
and demonstrators. The feeling they are learning and achieving their goals.
A wider evaluation will be done in the outcome Professional evaluation
(section 8).
5. Perform teaching and academic administration effectively
Management is required because there is a limited time and resources to
achieve the best results, and the final evaluation should be based in accurate
records and documentation.
From the point of view of lectures and laboratory classes, it is important to
point what have been done and where next class start.
At Imperial College, I used to control how many tasks students have to
perform and where is the critic threshold every week. Students close to the
threshold will require a closer monitoring to achieve their goals (evidence
#30).
From assessment point of view, records are required to evaluate participation
of students and work delivered. This is important to guarantee a fare
assessment at end of course.

At Manchester, the use of CourseMark is a huge help from management point
of view. All marks and deadlines are managed by it. Demonstrators do not
have to take notes or do management tasks.
However, it introduces a secondary management task: help students to plan
their tasks and monitor if they are not wasting time, because they have to
finish the problem by 5:00 pm, when the computer is powered off and they will
not have access to CourseMark.
By 3:00 I use to look after all the students and discuss with them the
problems. It is an active approach instead passive adopted during the first
part of section, but I try to make them agents in the process, only pointing
problems and guiding them to obtain by themselves the solution.
This is a very demanding task, because I have to perform the process for all
students.
One interesting case was one student did not have interest for computer
programming, and she just did not understand what was going on. She attend
the course because was mandatory at Imperial College, and she regrets “her
lack of intelligence”. It was very unusual, because she apologise before ask
questions and she had no self-confidence at all.
Unfortunately, in the first class one of her colleagues answered her showing
how stupid her questions were. I approach them and start telling more deep
points about her question, and develop her confidence pointing her question
was interesting.
I kept a record of where she was every class, how many questions have she
done, because I did not want to loose her. If the problem becomes severe,
she could abandon the course, which would mean a failure of the system.

It was a rewarding surprise she finished the course with A mark, and she
performed the project properly. Her development was outstanding, not only in
computer programming but in self confidence and self esteem as well.
Management records shown in evidence #30 allow an effective help of
students in need. At the end of the day, management is to use the resources
available (students time) to obtain the optimal result (good projects and
learning process done) in time.
6. Provide support to students on academic matters
Most of students frustration in the lab is consequence of do not establish a
connection between their cognitive structure and the algorithm’s reasoning.
Diagnostic students going through this anger/frustration state is trivial. Work in
laboratory consists develop software in the computer, using only hands and
brain. If the student start to look around, and move too much in his chair, it is
frustration processing growing.
This is result of anxiety because clock is ticking, 5:00 pm the work must be
done, and the student is paralysed.
The strategy I use to cope with this stressing condition is the direct approach.
Just ask the student "How do you do?" and wait him formalise the problem
and help him to find the right direction.
Student verbal explanation contains only part of the necessary elements to
write the problem specification and reduce it to a logic structure that can be
coded in the computer program. The demonstrator has to fulfil the reasoning
with pieces to form the complete algorithm.

Evidence #24 shows student copying the solution from a book, which uses a
different technique and was far from the student's comprehension, which drive
her upset because she does not understand the reasoning. There was not a
cognitive structure to connect with the algorithm. My intervention was
precisely what she needs.
Point out structures she did not know what was about (evidence #25), and
guide her developing her own solution.
Verification of the success came next week, when she was able to solve all
the problems (evidences #26 and #27) even the challenge problem and
achieve excellent marks (evidence #29). Solution of challenge problem
(evidence #28) was an evidence of her overcoming difficulties.
The barrier for a demonstrator successful attack is sort out the missing links in
student reasoning. We have to form a map, based in their description, of what
is missing. There is a lost of information due the verbal communication as
well.
Under stress, it is difficult to the student to describe the reasoning.
Demonstrator has to show confidence and knowledge about what is going on,
and supports the student to overcome the difficulties.
Sometimes, start from a common ground is a good strategy. For example, tell
the student what is the goal of the problem and what elementary tasks need
to be done.
This is a common ground, there are no arguments about it, and give the
demonstrator some time to understand what is going on, and what is missing
in the student reasoning.

In any case, situation must end with the demonstrator making clear for the
student that this is a normal process, and the student should think about how
they have overcome the difficulties using rational strategy, and how they have
coped with anxiety. It is not a coincidence that computers analysts have
higher incidence of heart attack and strokes due the lack of anxiety dealing
mechanisms and sedentary life.
7. Develop personal and professional coping strategies
There are several barriers in any apprenticeship. Some endogenous to the
issue, such as familiarity with abstraction, modelling, conceptualism, logic,
and implementation approaches. Chapter 6 point out how to cope with these
endogenous barriers specifically in programming languages.
However students are not alone, without social interaction. They are in a
cosmopolitan society, where several exogenous barriers could interfere with
learning process. From the constructivist point of view[12]
, "Whether
knowledge is seen as socially situated or whether it is considered to be an
individual construction has implications for the ways in which learning is
conceptualized. From the radical constructivist perspective, how can their
theory encompass both the collective activity and the individual experience to
take into account the important classroom social interactions that are so much
a part of the entire educational process? Such questions underlie the
complexities involved in translating the diversity of perspectives into a
common set of principles that can be operationalized."

Let us address some of these exogenous barriers in the laboratory and its
influence in learning process, to overcome the complexities and provide a
taxonomy of causes and possible course of actions.
a. Student’s background issues.
British education system is based in chronological classification of students.
Students are classified by age and each class evolves during all years without
any assessment. Promotion to next year is inevitable, besides mediocre
achievement.
British students face a new environment in the University with new rules. Each
course has its own evaluation process, and students are required to be
agents of learning process. This introduces a need for management skills and
techniques to cope with uncertainty and contingencies. Academic staff must
provide the necessary support in this new learning process. Teach them how
to learn and improve is vital.
b. Language issues.
Most students travel to UK to learn not only a new professional skill, but to
learn speak English. Students have the necessary level to understand and be
understood, but communication can be a barrier. The problem is how different
languages express information and how the student will assimilate new
knowledge in a new language.

There are differences of context and every language has its own way to code
information.
To reduce impact of foreigner language, demonstrators must speak slowly,
pronounce every word, and avoid use of idiomatic expressions.
c. Cultural issues.
Every country and group of people has his own set of values and principles,
which constitute their culture. Culture affects religion, social stratification, and
gender relations.
University is a cosmopolitan place, and students must not be discriminated
because they have different cultural values. In matter of fact, students should
have incentive to share their believes and cultural values, when it is
convenient and would improve or expand the issue under discussion.
Discussion should be driven taking in account that differences came from
different countries, with different geography, politics, economics and cultural
conditions.
The conclusion is every student is unique, with a different point of view,
adequate to their environment. They must be respect as individuals and
learning process must explore this diversity.
I have been working with Muslins, Russians, British, and every culture has his
appeal. I always tried to respect their beliefs as if their values are mine. They
are individuals like me, and if I have grown up in their environment, I probably
have their beliefs and costumes.

Evidences #1, #8, #11 shows the respect for their limits in the way I use to
prepare diagrams that avoid description in any language. The stress the
Chinese student went through (evidences #24 to #29) and the student at
Imperial College that apologise at any question are another examples of
coping strategies, dealing with all sort of personal problems, developing
student’s self-steam and avoiding impacts in the learning process.
There are several techniques I use to prepare to cope with different situations
(talks, lectures, and students’ interaction). Body language is an issue. You
can say thinks in a very methodological and conscious level, and your body
can still all your credibility.
Sometimes, even slight behaviours can affect the learning process. The tone
of your voice can be even worse. Students will not believe you are not upset if
you are shouting (a common behaviour when students are not able to
understand the concept).
Simulation of several classes of actions in front of a mirror is the best solution,
if you can not afford a video camera. See yourself in a crises situation is
important to give you a clear image of how you looks like, which allow you use
your own knowledge of how you behave to become more reliable for the
audience.
8. Reflect on own personal and professional practice and
development
Students went to University to acquire professional and personal values.
These values represent skills and abilities to perform a critic problem

evaluation and propose solutions, be able to manage its implementation, and
evaluate critically the work done.
At the end of the course, students want to achieve a professional status and
have their place in society as an active member.
My career development started in my Bachelor in Physics (evidence #31),
Master in Science (evidence #32) and PhD in Mechanical Engineering
(evidence #33). I can supervise students to achieve an excellence
professional status because I have been working developing new
technologies for industry since 1971. I developed 15 automation projects for
steel companies, 5 systems for public transport in Sao Paulo (the second
biggest city in the world), 9 automation projects for sugar and alcohol
production, 5 modernisation master plans for companies, and four
technological departments implementation (see evidence #34 and #35).
In academia, I developed several research projects using artificial intelligence
and grid technology (see evidence #36 to #40). A complete list of publications
is available at evidence #41.
I am able to establish a relation between the issue under discussion and its
relevance for a company project. These links make a huge difference in
student attention, and in the learning process. When the issue has a clear
relationship with practical and professional matters, students pay a lot of
attention and expend time considering options and strategies.
It is an effective and useful learning process. The student is facing the future
working challenge under controlled and supervised conditions. They are able
to make mistakes and learn with it.

In this context, I am able to provide students with guidance and support
prepare them for real situations that will make them better professionals and
better prepared for life.
During this course and teaching was a rewarding experience, and I am
thinking about became a lecturer to contribute to improve the supervision and
teaching process with my practical experience. Evidence 52 shows that I am
able to contribute even with my peers, through a friendly and interactive
teaching process.
9. Overview of mind maps to design learning activities
(Project-based developing learning and teaching module).
When I am preparing a talk or a class, millions of ideas came to my mind at
same time. I am not able to establish a sequential and sounding argument at
once.
I use to do a brainstorm and represent the ideas with mind maps (evidence
#42, training course at University of Manchester). Evidence #43 to #46 shows
the mind map for grid technology talks at BabarGrid-UK (Manchester), GridPP
meeting (Liverpool), and Babar Meeting (Dresden/Germany).
I start drawing mind map by one phrase/concept description (evidence #43). I
know everybody has his own interests, but what would I like people remember
from my talk?
I use to think as if I am waiting the lift and Bill Gates stands with me. We enter
the lift, and I have few minutes to sell him my idea. What should I say for him?
This is my phrase/concept description.

My talk needed to sell the idea that University of Manchester achieved the
necessary resources when I joined it to integrate Grid technology with Babar
experiment software. I developed a prototype and was important to show that
something was running with problems to justify a new funding, but with
potential to succeed.
Grid technology consists in middleware software called LCG2. It contains all
necessary infrastructures to allow users run its application using Internet as if
all available computers are one single huge computer resource.
Babar experiment software is a library with more than 850 modules physicists
can install and use to study matter constituents (called quarks). It uses data
from Linear Accelerator at University of Stanford (USA).
What I want people remember is that we are able to integrate LCG2 Job
submission with Babar CM2 software at Manchester for Tau physics
modelling, analysis and Monte Carlo generation. This is the central point of
the mind map, and its starting point.
Another important point is show possible interesting research using edge
technology to solve fundamental problems in grid production. I proposed the
use of Artificial Intelligence to model interactions and production environment
for optimisation of resource use.
After have define the central concept, I just write the ideas with links in the
central concept, and ideas connected with other ideas, creating a map of
concepts and its relationship. This is in agreement with constructivist point-of-
view.

The next step I took lots of A4 half pages and start writing the ideas with some
relation (evidence #44). This establishes independent modules that can be
reused or removed from the final talk.
To deliver these modules, I use PowerPoint to edit slides in a very didactic
and attractive way. I try do not use too much visual effects to avoid pollution
(evidence #45).
To evaluate efficacy of my talk I invited a colleague to attend it (evidence
#46). Two months later, I sent her a set of questions about my talk and asked
her to answer without review my slides. She got the important points, what the
software was intended to do and there still having problems to sort out and
solve. She pointed even interesting points about how I could present the work
in a more collaborative approach and get people involved. This feedback was
very important because I had worked only 2 months in the project when I gave
the talk, and I need to obtain the funding to stay at University of Manchester.
The talk was a success, the funding was renewed and I received a lot of
feedback from Babar Community.
I would like to develop mind maps to represent knowledge and support
learning design because it is a graphical way to represent knowledge and how
it is related in our brain’s cognitive structure, based in a constructivist point of
view. There are extensive references (evidence #47), and evidence #46
supports its efficacy.
10. Show how own practice with regard to the above
outcomes is underpinned by specific proof values
Learning process can be seen as a complex interactive system, with several
components (Fig. 2).

Students are under pressure to achieve several goals, attend social demands,
and find their place in society. Every student is unique, with his cultural and
social development.
Students are agents of learning process, but facilitators can improve and
fastener the process. Facilitator should provide means for students overcome
difficulties and develop themselves through his experience and skills.
My own practice is underpinned by several professional values, which I have
been showing in this portfolio.
The understanding of how people learning is supported by constructivist
understanding of how students acquire new knowledge and skills through
reflection and abstraction (evidences #1 to #13), and how assessment should
be understood as a feedback in the student’s agent learning process.
Evidences of different assessment methods are a testimony of my attempt to
improve it encouraging the facilitator with the student to overcome the
assessment (evidences #18 to #23).

Fig. 2 Learning Process Context.
I have been evaluated by several independents referees, my ability to teach,
and my commitment to scholarship (evidences #14 to #17, and #51). The
process have going through a team work with colleagues from CLTHE, other
demonstrators, and senior lecturers which whom I have exchange
experiences and discussed several issues. This is a continuity of my own
work methodology in industry, where team work is fundamental because none
has all skills and experiences, and a collective work supersedes in quality and
standards compliance.
Lectures and demonstrators work effectively with diversity, inclusivity and
coping strategies in their day-by-day. Students have to overcome technical
issues (evidences #24 to #28) and achieve their goals (evidence #29). They
STUDENT:
-values/culture
-Background
-Motivation
-Knowledge
-Feelings
WORK MARKET
-Companies’ goals
-Requirements
-Qualifications
-Rewards
SOCIAL
ENVIRONMENT:
-Behavioural
requirements
-Interaction
-Resources
-Demand Pressure
FACILITATOR:
-manage learning
process
-Provide support
(academic/pastor
al)
-Professional
experience
-Skills
LABORATORY:
-Experiencing the
learning process
-Controlled and
supervised resource

are allowed to make mistakes and I guide them learning and understanding
what was wrong through inducing them think in a holistic point of view.
I believe this is my duty, prepare them to assume a critical posture in front
difficulties and problems. This will allow them deliver solutions and analysis
with mature skills.
At the end of the day, this is the requirement for a successful professional in
modern work market. Be able to adapt him easily to a world changing in the
speed of light, keeping always critical evaluation of him and the environment
surrounding.
We need to support them in the process, providing guidance and inspiration
through a critical and systematic reflection on our own professional practice
(evidences #31 to #41).
This is an endless process, evident through my own development process in
this course. Evidence #48 shows the first material I sent to my tutor Dr David
Riley, my successful experiences (evidence #48) and the learning agreement
of this project (evidence #49). Evidence #50 contains the assessment to my
portfolio by my colleague Katja.
Through the development of this portfolio, I have been
through a deep discussion about all the outcomes and their
impact in my professional practice. My evolution since the
first ideas about the portfolio reflects a deep understanding of
my role as learning facilitator. The portfolio is itself an
evidence of this outcome.
References
1. http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/t/x/txl166/kb/theory/Beh.html
2. http://web.cocc.edu/cbuell/theories/cognitivism.htm
3. von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). A constructivist approach to teaching. In L.
Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.). (1995). Constructivism in education, (pp.3-16).
New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

4. Fosnot, C. (1996). Constructivism: A Psychological theory of learning. In
C. Fosnot (Ed.) Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice, (pp.8-
33). New York: Teachers College Press.
5. von Glasersfeld, E. (1996).Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C.
Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice, (pp.3-7).
New York: Teachers College Press.
6. http://www.cdli.ca/~elmurphy/emurphy/cle2b.html
7. von Glasersfeld, E. (1987). Learning as a constructive activity. In C.
Janvier, Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of
mathematics, (pp.3-17). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.,
p. 15
8. Ertmer, P.A. and Newby, T.J. (1993). Behaviorism, Cognitivism,
Constructivism: Comparing critical features from an Instructional Design
perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72.
9. http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/t/x/txl166/kb/theory/compar.html
10. PEDAGOGY AND SOCIOLOGY; http://www.sociologyyorku.blogspot.com/
11. http://www.eduplace.com/science/profdev/articles/badders.html
12. Murphy, Elizabeth, 1997, Constructivist Learning Theory. On-line Available
http://www.stemnet.nf.ca/~elmurphy/emurphy/cle2b.html

modelling and implementation (3 cases).
The diagram shows the three different implementations to be developed
in the problems, from the data modelling point of view (right hand side)
and data modelling point of view (left hand side). The idea is to show
how the three implementations are different and how use different C
structures to implement it.
The diagram shows the concept of data container and how to
operate with it. Each box represents a structure element and
its components. Components are also grouped in su-
structures. Latter in the course, students will learn about
classes and establish a relationship between the boxes and
classes. This is a very important concept in software
development: object oriented programming.
This diagram shows the algorithm to implement matrix multiplication.
Each element of the resultant matrix is related with operations between
elements highlighted by different colours.
18. Computer assessment
This is the output of CourseMark software. Each criteria and
requirement are clearly explained and the final mark is compose from
each achieved requirement.
30. Supervision spreadsheet
I developed this spreadsheet to mark students at Imperial College. The
central part represents where each student were seat along all course,
and their names. Each week I collected what task they have achieved
and control the rhythm of the course to allow them have 3 weeks for the
final project. Students late would have special attencion.

/********************************************************************
*****
*
* Three-dimensional vector_sum program
* PWM 16/11/04
*
*********************************************************************
*****/
#include <iostream>
#include <fstream>
#include <cmath>
using namespace std;
/* vec3 represents a 3D vector, where
x = r*sin(phi)*cos(theta)
y - r*sin(phi)*sin(theta)
z = r*cos(phi)
r = sqrt(x*x + y*y + z*z)
theta = atan(y/x)
phi = acos(z/r)
*/
struct vec3{
double x;
double y;
double z;
double r;
double theta;
double phi;
};
// vec3 functions, taking pointer to vec3 as first argument
void print_vec3(vec3* vp);
void x_y_z(vec3* vp);
void r_theta_phi(vec3* vp);
void sum_array(vec3* vp2, vec3* vec_array, vec3* end);
int main(void){
const int MAX = 100;
vec3 va[MAX];
// read in the r, theta, phi values
// after input end points just past end of active array
// input terminates when r < 0
vec3* end;
for(end = va; end - va < MAX; ++end){
cout << "Please enter three values for r, theta and phi
(r < 0 to end): ";
cin >> end->r;
if(end->r < 0) break;
cin >> end->theta >> end->phi;
x_y_z(end);
}
// output the values
cout << "nThe array of 3D vectors is: " << endl;

for(vec3* vp = va; vp - end; ++vp){
cout << "Element " << int(vp - va) << ':';
print_vec3(vp);
cout << endl;
}
// now sum the vectors in the array
vec3 vsum;
vsum.x = vsum.y = vsum.z = 0;
sum_array(&vsum, va, end);
r_theta_phi(&vsum);
// output the vector sum
cout << "nThe vector sum of the array elements is " << endl;
print_vec3(&vsum);
cout << endl << endl;
} // end of main()
// function to print out one vector
void print_vec3(vec3* vp){
cout << "tx = " << vp->x << "ty = " << vp->y << "tz = " <<
vp->z << 'n'
<< "ttr = " << vp->r << "ttheta = " << vp->theta <<
"tphi = " << vp->phi ;
}
// calcualte x, y and z, given r,theta and phi
void x_y_z(vec3* vp){
vp->x = vp->r * sin(vp->phi) * cos(vp->theta);
vp->y = vp->r * sin(vp->phi) * sin(vp->theta);
vp->z = vp->r * cos(vp->phi);
}
// calculate r, theta and phi, given x, y and z
void r_theta_phi(vec3* vp){
vp->r = sqrt(pow(vp->x, 2) + pow(vp->y, 2) + pow(vp->z, 2));
vp->theta = atan2(vp->y, vp->x);
if(vp->r) vp->phi = acos(vp->z/vp->r);
else vp->phi = 0.;
}
// sum the vectors in the array vec_array up to end; result in *vp2
void sum_array(vec3* vp2, vec3* vec_array, vec3* end){
for(vec3* vp1 = vec_array; vp1 - end; ++vp1){
vp2->x += vp1->x;
vp2->y += vp1->y;
vp2->z += vp1->z;
}
}

/********************************************************************
***********
*
* 3 x 3 matrix inversion
* PWM
* 25/11/04
*
*********************************************************************
**********/
#include <iostream>
#include <fstream>
#include <cstdlib>
#include <cmath>
using namespace std;
void print_mat3(double m[3][3]);
int main(){
double m1[3][3], m2[3][3], m3[3][3] = {};
char infilename[20];
cout << "Please enter input file name. " ;
cin >> infilename;
ifstream in(infilename);
if(!in){
cerr << "Failed to open input file " << infilename <<
endl;
exit(1);
}
// read in matrix dimension
int dim;
in >> dim;
if(dim != 3){
cerr << "Program deals only with 3 x 3 matrices." <<
endl;
exit(1);
}
for(int j = 0; j < 3; ++j)
for(int k = 0; k < 3; ++k)
in >> m1[j][k];
// output matrix
cout << "nThe original matrix is " << endl;
print_mat3(m1);
double a = m1[0][0], b = m1[0][1], c = m1[0][2];
double d = m1[1][0], e = m1[1][1], f = m1[1][2];
double g = m1[2][0], h = m1[2][1], i = m1[2][2];
// calculate determinant
double det_m1 = a*(e*i - f*h) - b*(d*i - f*g) + c*(d*h
- e*g);
if(!det_m1){

cout << "Singular matrix." << endl;
exit(2);
}
else
cout << "The determinant of the matrix is " << det_m1 <<
endl;
// calculate inverse matrix
m2[0][0] = e*i - f*h;
m2[0][1] = c*h - b*i;
m2[0][2] = b*f - c*e;
m2[1][0] = f*g - d*i;
m2[1][1] = a*i - c*g;
m2[1][2] = c*d - a*f;
m2[2][0] = d*h - e*g;
m2[2][1] = b*g - a*h;
m2[2][2] = a*e - b*d;
for(int j = 0; j < 3; ++j)
for(int k = 0; k < 3; ++k)
m2[j][k] /= det_m1;
// print out inverse
cout << "nThe inverse matrix is " << endl;
print_mat3(m2);
// multiply m1 and m2, result in m3
for(int j = 0; j < 3; ++j)
for(int k = 0; k < 3; ++k)
for(int m = 0; m < 3; ++m)
m3[j][k] += m1[j][m] * m2[m][k];
// print out product
cout << "The product of the two is " << endl;
print_mat3(m3);
} // end of main()
void print_mat3(double m[3][3]){
cout << endl;
for(int j = 0; j < 3; ++j){
for(int k = 0; k < 3; ++k)
cout << m[j][k] << 't';
cout << endl;
}
cout << endl;
}

To: jamwer <jamwer@pc73.hep.man.ac.uk>
From: "Joanna D. Haigh" <j.haigh@imperial.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: James CLTHE
Hello James
We're fine. Computing teaching is much the same but with additional
introductory sessions on measurements,errors & statistics and how
to use Excel to plot graphs and do stats.
I'm glad all is going well in Manchester and that you are taking a teaching
course.
I don't have any criticisms of your teaching in our C++ lab so I attach the
reference I sent to Manchester for your files.
Best wishes,
Joanna
At 10:29 01/11/2004, you wrote:
>Dear Joanna,
>How are you?
>I am fine here at Manchester. I enjoyed so much demonstrate laboratory
>under your supervision that I am attending the post graduate course to
>obtain the Certificate Learning and Teaching in High Education.
>I also am teaching C here in Manchester.
>I would appreciate very much if you could send me an email telling your
>evaluation about my work with you with sugestions to improve. This is very
>important because I would drive my studies with it. I will put it in
>my portfolio with evidences to demonstrate that I have experience
>demonstrating laboratories.
>Thanks. All the best!
>James
>
>-------------------------------------------
>
>James Cunha Werner PhD, MSc, Bsc
>Optimisation and Automation Technologies
>
>Phone: 0161 275 4150
>Fax: 0161 273 5867
>
>High Energy Physics- Physics Department
>University of Manchester
>Schuster Laboratory
>Brunswick Street
>Manchester M13 9PL
>

>Homepage: www.geocities.com/jamwer2002
>
>-------------------------------------------
Prof. Joanna D. Haigh
Space and Atmospheric Physics, Blackett Laboratory,
Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK
phone: +44 (0)20 7594 7671 fax: +44 (0)20 7594 7900
email: j.haigh@imperial.ac.uk www: http://www.sp.ph.imperial.ac.uk/~joanna

Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 14:16:16 +0100
From: David Riley <Mtussdar@fs1.cdce.man.ac.uk>
Reply-To: david.riley@manchester.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Observation feedback
Hi,
Here is the observation; I used the layout of the form for
feedback you have an example of.
David.
Observer comments:
1.Clarity of aims, objectives and outcomes
The aims of each session are clear for the students, as
it is part of a well structured course. The objectives also
are clear and the outcome. I felt that the way the
session was electronically marked might have been a
bit clearer for them but this wasn^? part of your design in
the course.
2.Delivery and presentation (eg. Structure, pace, voice
management)
This was clear and well tailored to each student^? ability.
You were able to help without revealing any one
^?orrect^?way to solve the problem.
3.Knowledge of subject: (eg. Evidence of
research/scholarship, ability to convey enthusiasm)
Very impressive knowledge, enthusiasm and humour.
1. Student focus (eg. Awareness of
individual and diverse need, rapport,
flexibility)
Well thought out approach, treating
students as individuals. Aware of the
different levels and pace students were
working at
5.Management of learning environment (eg
facilitation skills and planning/maintenance
of physical environment)

This was not something you have control
over. It seems to work well enough as it is.
Any thoughts as to how you would want to
do it? Was it different in other places you
have taught?
6.Structure and timekeeping
Not really applicable. Do you find students
struggle to finish the problems in the time
allocated sometimes? What do you do
about this?
7.Use of resources:
Your diagram on your notes (the program in
memory etc.) seemed to work well and
students seemed to understand it as an aid to your explanations.
Interpersonal skills:(eg ability to give
feedback, offer counsel or guidance, show
sensitivity
Very good; see 2 and 4 above.
9.General comments on any other aspects
as agreed:
An interesting session to observe; I look
forward to any thoughts you may have.
David Riley
Programme Head, History & Archaeology
Centre for Continuing Education
Humanities Building
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Tel: 0161 275 3303

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 12:42:30 +0000
From: Peter Mitchell <peter.mitchell@manchester.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: James - Laboratory Demo
Dear James,
Here are my comments. Sorry for the delay.
With best wishes,
Peter Mitchell
Lecturer for PC2161
========================================================
> 1.Clarity of aims, objectives and outcomes
>
>
James has always come to the lab sessions having thought hard about the
exercises set for that week. He has made notes to refer to to assist the
students, and he has been very clear as to what is to be communicated.
> 2.Delivery and presentation (eg. Structure, pace, voice management,)
>
>
Computer lab demonstrating requires one-to-one discussion, which he has
conducted professionally.
> 3.Knowledge of subject: (eg. Evidence of research/scholarship, ability to
> convey enthusiasm)
>
>
>
James is probably better qualified than I am concerning the material (C++
language), but his enthusiasm has been positively infectious.
> 4. Student focus (eg. Awareness of individual and diverse need, rapport,
> flexibility)
>
>
He has been able to address each student's needs on demand.
> 5.Management of learning environment (eg facilitation skills and
> planning/maintenance of physical environment)
>
>

This has not been within his control.
> 6.Structure and time-keeping
>
>
His time-keeping has been impeccable.
> 7.Use of resources: (eg AV equipment, handouts, IT)
>
>
It is unusual in the context of demonstrating a computer lab to use aids, but
James has devised and prepared some interesting and very helpful diagrams
to assist the students' understanding. He has used these on a one-to-one
basis very effectively.
> 8.Interpersonal skills:(eg ability to give feedback, offer counsel or
> guidance, show sensitivity
>
>
You can sometimes detect that students would prefer NOT to be seen by a
particular demonstrator. I have not seen that with James, but if anything the
reverse. They wait until he is free before asking for help. So I think he must
be doing this part right.
> 9.General comments on any other aspects as agreed:
>
>
James is one of a small number of demonstrators on whom I have relied
when I have needed to discuss particular aspects of the exercises, or even
finer points of the language.
I have struggled to think of any suggestions for improvement.
Peter W Mitchell
13th December 2004
========================================================
On 29 Nov 2004, at 8:42, jamwer wrote:
> Dear Peter,
> I need your evaluation of my work in your laboratories to attach in my
> portfolio. Would you please answer the following questions about my
> demonstrations sections?
>
> 1.Clarity of aims, objectives and outcomes

>
>
> 2.Delivery and presentation (eg. Structure, pace, voice management,)
>
>
> 3.Knowledge of subject: (eg. Evidence of research/scholarship, ability to
> convey enthusiasm)
>
>
> 4. Student focus (eg. Awareness of individual and diverse need, rapport,
> flexibility)
>
>
> 5.Management of learning environment (eg facilitation skills and
> planning/maintenance of physical environment)
>
>
> 6.Structure and time-keeping
>
>
> 7.Use of resources: (eg AV equipment, handouts, IT)
>
>
> 8.Interpersonal skills:(eg ability to give feedback, offer counsel or
> guidance, show sensitivity
>
>
> 9.General comments on any other aspects as agreed:
>
>
> Thank you very much.
> James
>
>

Week 4 Assignment
A 3-vector class and a Lorentz 4-vector class
Marking Sheet
Assignment should be finished by 4:45 pm 25th
February 2005. Marked sheet should
be returned to Dr. H. Zhang.
Weight 15%.
Student Name:
1. Complete the 3-vector class, defined in Vec3.h and Vec3.cpp (5%).
1. Add subtraction and vector product (2%).
2. Add accessors for polar coordinates - magnitude and polar and
azimuthal angles (2%).
3. Write a program to test and demonstrate the features that you add
(1%).
4. Submit source (.cpp) files, header (.h) files, test program and sample
output.
2. Design and implement a Lorentz 4-vector class (10%).
1. The 4-vector should be composed of your 3-vector for the space part
and a double for the time part (3%).
2. Implement Lorentz boost (5%).
3. Write a program to test and demonstrate your implementation (2%).
4. Submit source (.cpp) files, header (.h) files, test program and sample
output.
Tutor’s name:
Signature:
Date:

Week 5 Assignment
A string class based on C strings
Marking Sheet
Due time: before 4:45 pm, Friday, 11th
March, 2005. Marked sheet should be returned
to Dr. H. Zhang.
Name:
Date:
You may submit the assignment by finishing either the basic part or the basic +
advanced parts. For the advanced parts, you should finish on your own to get full
marks.
Basic requirements (5%):
• It should have a constructor to initialize a string (e.g., string a(“hello”)) (1%)
• Copy function (1%)
• Addition of strings (2%)
• Assignment operation (1%)
Advanced requirements (5%):
• Implement left addition of a C character and a C string (1%).
• Implement right addition of a C character and a C string (1%)
• implement find operations on a C character, a C string and your string (3%).
Tutor Name
Tutor Signature Date

Week 7 Assignment
Marking Sheet
Exercise of inheritance – construct a cube class based on a rectangle class
Due time: 15 April 2005
Marked sheet should be returned to Dr. H. Zhang
Weight (5%)
Name:
Date:
1. (2%)
To construct a rectangle class, which
a) holds information such as the length, width and area of the rectangle;
b) has various constructors and destructor;
c) has functions to access the details of the rectangle and compute the area of the
rectangle.
2. (3%)
To develop a cube class, which inherits all functions of the rectangle class and
d) holds information about the height and volume of the cube;
e) has various constructors and destructor;
1) has functions to access the details of the cube and compute the volume of the
cube.
Tutor’s Name
Tutor’s signature:
Date

WorkShopAss 19th March 2005
Points under discussion by learning set members:
Why assess:
-We have been assessed all life. Measure what lecturers and students have
achieved.Bases for mutual feedback.
-Part of learning process. Gauge student's learning & ability to apply
-Identify needs (individual & group). Heterogeneous classes (students with few
skills to skilled ones) will drive assessment methods.
-Feedback to lecturers about the course and how they are delivering the content,
driving the process.
-Feedback to students help them in their learning strategy and commitment, and
develop their self-confidence.
-Assessment and learning curve: quantitative approach. How learning courve
variance influences content deliver and learning process.
-Assess to provide society with professionals with satisfatory quality standards.
-Education should result in changes. Assessment measure these changes.
-Assessment helps reflect in Kobe cycle.
-Help make connections between concepts.
Assessment should be:
-valid
-reliable
-fair
-transparent
-equitable.
Aligning assessment:
-aims -> intented learning outcomes -> methods of learning -> assessment methods
& tasks -> criteria -> marking/feedback
Goals of assessment:
-Assessment evaluate course goals and outcomes: efficacy of learning process and
every student taken their own merit.
-Measure how students developed themselves in the course.
Influences on assessment:
-Evaluate results and achievements: subjective criterias and goals.
-Different people give different marks for the same work.
-Political external influences over our work. We have bosses and leaders with their
own point of view. Decisions are out of our control.
-Good teaching/good delive means good results. Are we intented to give good marks
to show we are good?
-Student/teacher interface: who is the expert? Perception of expertise: focus on
diversity.
Approaches to learning:
-Deep approach;
-Surface approach

-Strategic approach
Planning assessment:
-Manageable assessment: something lecturers will not spend too much effort.
-Different goals:
-during the course, formative assessment. Review feedback during course.
-end of course, summative assessment. Blind assessment. Takes place at the end of
a course and/or contribute to final grade.
-journals show how they evolve during the course. Students are amazed with their
improvement comparing their first entries with final ones.
-different types described in Race Lecturer's Toolkit Book page 31.
-Criteria and requirements:
-present facts (process information). Structure and clear objectives.
-examples and evidences
-supporting the argument (case support).
-references
-development of argument. Clear delivery
-definition of terms
-critical thinking skills
-concepts. How evolves.
-content
-process fair and transparent.
-use of audio visual aids; engage audience; enthusiasm; musicallity; hand out.
Ethics of assessment:
-teacher's own agenda
-external agendas
-quality issues.
-reliability issues.
Knowledge X skills:
-knowledge: generic information about some field.
-skill: expertness, applied knowledge to some process.
-Knowledge is what remains from school after long time. Skill allow professionals
do their job.
-Mix of both is very clear in any learning outcomes.
Assessment is the judgement of evidence submitted for a specific purpose is therefore
an aid of measurement.
It requires two things: evidence and a standard or scale.
Kathryn Eccletone; Understanding assessment; NIACE 1994
Standard or scales all involve measuring that individuals against:
-referencial - an absolute criterion (driver license).
-norm referenced - a cohort or group (Olympics gold medal). only top marks pass.
-self-assessment: the learner's own previous performance (weightwatchers)
References:
Biggs,J.B. 1982; Evaluating the quality of learning the solo taxonomy structure of the
observed learning outcome, New York.

Entwistle 1994; Teaching and the quality of learning CVCP/SRHE.
Bond,D. !985; Reflecting: turning experience into learning; Kogan Page.
LTSN Assessment series

Learning Sets: Record of Meeting
Date & time of meeting: 8 April 2005 Place: Centre for Continuing Education
16.45-17.45am
Names of those present: Martin Rigby
Katja Stuerzenhofecker
James Werner
Summary of main issues discussed: Dealing with students' emotional responses
to assessment
• Teacher's issues: Don't become part of the students' problem. Stay on their side and
leave the problem on the other side.
Have clear learning outcomes to protect yourself.
• Student's issues: Help students to use stress positively
Help students to be more realistic
Develop students' self-confidence
Find the common ground
Get students to use feedback for improvement
Future action agreed:
• Katja to email notes
• Arrange the final Action Learning Set meeting to share and discuss draft
portfolios (as far as we have got) in the week starting 16 May.
Signed by representative of group:
Katja Stuerzenhofecker

Evidence #41: International Conference papers
Werner,J.C.; Kalganova,J.C.; “Risk Evaluation using Evolvable
Discriminate Function.” ECML/PKDD2003 Discovery Challenge.
Kalganova,T.; Karol, I.M.; Werner,J.C.; Silkou,N.I.; Lipnitskaya,N.G.;
“Probability prediction method of throat cancer with use of
discriminate function” (in Russian) 2nd
International Belarusian-Polish
Conference on Otorhinolaryngology: Actual Problems in
Otorhinolaryngology, Grodno, 29-30 May 2003
Werner,J.C.; Kalganova,J.C.; “Disease modeling using Evolved
Discriminate Function”. LNCS 2610, Proceedings 6th European
Conference, EuroGP 2003, Essex, UK, April 14-16, 2003.
Werner,J.C.; Fogarty,T.C.; “Severe diseases diagnostics using Genetic
Programming.” Intelligent Data Analysis in medicine and
pharmacology – IDAMAP2001; September 4th
, 2001 London
Werner,J.C.; Fogarty,T.C.; “Genetic programming applied to Collagen
disease & thrombosis.” PKDD 2001 Challenge on Thrombosis data –
Germany/ Freiburg September 3-7
Werner,J.C.; Fogarty,T.C.; “Genetic control applied to asset
managements.” EuroGP2002 – Kinsale/Ireland April 3-5,2002.
Werner,J.C.; Fogarty,T.C.; “Artificial intelligence applied to
rescheduling and optimisation.” Operational Research Society (UK):
Simulation Study Group Two day workshop 20-21 March 2002-
University of Birmingham.
Werner,J.C.; Sotelo Jr,J.; Lima,R.G.; Fogarty,T.C.; “Active noise control
in ducts using genetic algorithms.” Active 2002 – Southampton July
15-17 2002.
Werner,J.C.; “Genetic programming applied to pharmaceutical drugs
design.” Data mining Cup 2001 of The Seventh ACM SIGKDD
International Conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining –
USA/ San Francisco, August 26-29,2001.
Werner,J.C.; “Genetic programming applied to gene function
identification.” Data mining Cup 2001 of The Seventh ACM SIGKDD
USA/ San Francisco, August 26-29,2001
Werner,J.C.; “Genetic programming applied to gene location
identification.” Data mining Cup 2001 of The Seventh ACM SIGKDD
USA/ San Francisco, August 26-29,2001
Werner,J.C.; Sotelo Jr,J.; "A parallel DSP architecture running genetic
algorithms applied to acoustic noise cancellation" II European
DSP education and research conference - Paris/French - 1998.
Werner,J.C.; Sotelo Jr,J.; "A parallel genetic algorithms applied to
acoustic noise cancellation" Int. Symp. on artificial intelligence in
real time control-USA-1998.
Werner,J.C.; Sotelo Jr,J.; "A parallel genetic algorithms applied to
acoustic noise cancellation" VI Pan American congress of applied
mechanics - PACAM VI/DINAME 99 - Brazil.
Werner,J.C.; Sotelo Jr,J.; "Active control of noise in ducts" I Iberian-
American Congress of Acoustic –SOBRAC - Brazil 1998.

Werner,J.C.; Sotelo Jr,J.; "Active acoustic noise control in ducts in 3-
dimensional enclosed space" XIII U.S. National Congress of Applied
Mechanics-USA- 1998.
Werner,J.C.; Sotelo Jr,J.; "Active Control of noise in ducts using
genetic algorithms" II Symposium on Research Polytechnic School of
USP-1997.
Werner,J.C.; Sotelo Jr,J.; “Optimisation of batch fermentation through
genetic algorithms and optimal techniques” IASTED Applied
Modelling and Simulation /Banff - CANADA 1997.
Werner,J.C.; Sotelo Jr,J.; “Active acoustic noise control in ducts”
DINAME 97 - International Symposium on Dynamic of Machines of the
Brazilian Association for Mechanics Science – March/1997 pages 193
to 195.

Evidence #46: Talk evaluation 2 months later.
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:57:06 +0000 (GMT)
From: Christina Edgar <christina@hep.man.ac.uk>
To: jamwer <jamwer@hep.man.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: James Evaluation
Hi James,
I'll do my best. Please don't be disheartened if I can't remember details. They do say that,
even with the best will in the world, most people only retain 20% of what they are told!!
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004, jamwer wrote:
> Dear Chris,
>
> I would appreciate very much if you could answer the following
> questions about my talk "Enabling grid for HEP" two months ago.
> I am doing postgraduate course in teaching, and I need to know
> what you remember from my talk, if it make you think about, and
> how did you feel.
> Please do not look the slides to answer the questions.
> 1. What was the talk about?
Getting GRID set up at Manchester (Tier A or 1?) Also about a job
submission trial you did which involved typing only one command (which
didn't work a fair percentage of the time).
> 2. Have the talk make you think about how grid/job submission would
> help you in your day-by-day?
The principle is very interesting and sounds useful - submit a job and it
gets split up into many pieces to allow the workload to be spread - but I
am not sure that my perception of GRID changed much.
> 3. Have you changed something or have you make any decision due the talk?
Nope - sorry!
> 4. Tell me your impressions about the talk:
> 4.1 How I delivered the issue?

With confidence. You were convincing as to assuring me that you knew what
you were talking about. However, in places, your talk did not seem aimed
at the right audience: the talk was to fellow GRID computing people but
your talk was aimed at the user. This is probably as you did not know
what the parallel sessions were like. In BaBar you do not need to sell
yourself as having all the answers but rather you should offer up ideas
and solutions for discussion with fellow BaBarians. The key word is
collaboration. I hope that the people who mentioned various hypernews and
helpful things did, in fact, email you details and so now you should be in
contact with people working on similar issues to you.
> 4.2 The slides. What do you remember of it and how do you evaluate
> it?
Mainly writing? Bullet points. Code written up - command line, at least.
I don't remember any coloured background or template style but I could be
doing you an injustice in saying that. Many talks that get given at BaBar
look very plain. I think it is nice to have a standard layout throughout
the presentation - maybe headers and footers or a shaded background? It
is all personal preference.
> 4.3 The reaction from the audience.
People were definitely listening. There was a lot of feedback.
Personally, I think you concentrated on your idea that "didn't quite work
out" whereas you could have spent much more time describing how you have
got the GRID up and working at Manchester. I think people would have been
very impressed with that! The audience acknowledged your enthusiasm. An
audience of people working in the same field as you can be quite hostile -
I think they were. This is where the idea of presenting ideas, rather
than saying you have the solution, might have helped.
> 4.4 Your feelings during the talk.
It was interesting. You were certainly engaging. It is not my subject at
all - computing - so I was pleased to find that I understood 90% of what
you were talking about.
> I have to show evidences and make a self assessment based in your answers.
> Your answer are crucial important for my homework.
> Thanks for your help and all the best.
> James
>

I hope these ramblings are helpful. I have been honest in my opinion of
your talk in the hopes of being useful to you in future presentations.
Please do not take offence at any of my remarks -remember I am only
giving one person's opinion.
Thanks,
Christina =;-)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* *
* Mrs Christina Edgar *
* PhD Student at The University of Manchester *
* *
* **** http://www.hep.man.ac.uk/u/christina **** *
* *
* Currently based at SLAC... *
* Office phone: 650 926 8550 *
* Address: Mail Stop 41, Building 280, *
* SLAC, 2575 Sand Hill Road, *
* Menlo Park, California 94025 USA *
* *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Dear David,
Please find bellow the material for our meeting this week. It contains the 4 itens of
first core task. I would like very much you could provide me with your experience not
only in the dissertation structure, but in the way I intent to approach the issue as well.
Do you have good references to improve the work? There are so many papers about
the issue.
I will be available Tuesday & Thursday all day, and Monday afternoon.
Best regards,
James
1. Profile and self-audit comprising:
a. Hopes and expectations concerning the course
I am attending this postgraduate course to increase my chances to get a permanent
Lecturer job at University of Manchester.
I have a good record of publications and research in computing science and artificial
intelligence, however teaching still a weak point in my CV.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. SWOT analysis in relation to my current role:
STRONG:
Professional experience in industry: I am able to supervise students and teach
courses that has practical contents.
Successful teaching experiences in several industries (trainning users in
softwares I developed) and universitiers.
Successful learning experiences, such as my PhD
Enthusiasm in the issue: I like to teach computer and programming issues.
Management practice in several large projects.
Research portfolio with more than 20 international publications.
WEAK:
Knowledge of learning/teaching methods
lack of experience teaching for undergraduates
Modesty.
OPORTUNITY:
CLTHE available will boost my CV
Post graduate certificate will improve my employability over other candidates
Improve my skills and quality of service
study programming computer laboratory and discuss different approaches and
methodologies
THREAT:
The students do not understand the issue:
-Lack of previous information (not in the module)
-Lack of understanding in the session
-Gap of information (something trivial for me).

-Relevance of issue for the student
Be ready to overcome any unplanned gap/difficulty in class
student plagiarism
market overcrowded with lectures
discrimination (I am Brazilian).
reduction number students high education
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Summary Curriculum Vitae:
Qualifications
Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering (optimisation and control) - Sao Paulo State
University - 1999.
Master in Science - Sao Paulo State University - 1984.
Bachelor in Physics - Sao Paulo State University - 1981.
Career History
Researcher in Department of High Energy Physics/Grid Computing at University of
Manchester from June 2004, developing grid computing for Babar community.
Researcher in Department of High Energy Physics/Grid Computing at IMPERIAL
COLLEGE between October 2003 and June 2004, evaluating the Community
Authorisation Server (CAS) and Globus Toolkit 3 (GT3) for e-Science UK project
Research Fellow in Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering at Brunel
University between October 2002 and September 2003, applying the artificial
intelligence framework (PhD Thesis) for medical data mining. This technology was
transferred to Belarusian Medical Academy and Belarusian State University allowing
the diagnostic and treatment optimisation in Belarus, consequence of Chernobyl's
nuclear radioactive contamination accident.
Research Fellow at South Bank University between April 2001 and September 2002,
applying the artificial intelligence framework (PhD Thesis) for industrial
optimisation.
Partner of Gentech Inf. Aut. Tecn. S/C Ltda between 1995 and 2001, developing and
applying the PhD Thesis framework in companies process simulations.
Adviser in Research and Industrial Automation Manager at Zillo-Lorenzetti Company
- June/1989 to April/1995, with the implementation of new technologies for industrial
and agriculture processes for sugar and alcohol production.
Software development for Procontrol System Engineering, Co from April/1986 to
May/1989 supervising the Software Laboratory and managing the automation
software projects.
System Analyst at Metropolitan Company of S? Paulo (Metro) from September/1984
to April/1986, developing the Transport Simulation and Evaluation System and the
scientific support of the underground system.
Professor of Physics at Objetivo High School from August/1980 to March/1982.
Teaching Experience

I have been teaching Programming Language in the Laboratory at Imperial College
for 1st year Physics students (undergraduate) 6 hours/week. I supervise the project
development of 7 students per term.
I have developed a Modern Artificial Intelligence course, focused in adaptive
methods, neural networks, genetic algorithms, genetic programming, and fuzzy logic
to provide the student with a detailed knowledge of AI framework, both design and
analysis. While students are encouraged to work on projects of personal interest,
topics are also suggested and all projects are supervised to generate a panel for
presentation in an "Artificial Intelligence Fair".
Real time software I have been developing for industry requires a large effort in user
training and technology transfer. It is an extreme condition teaching where the users
have different previous experience and skills and the issue is a multidisciplinary field.
My experience teaching Physics in high school developed new approaches and
didactic for Arts, humanities and social sciences to keep them motivated and in touch
with the classes (50 students per class without presence list).
Research and Administration experience
I have been working developing new technologies for industry since 1984. I
developed 15 automation projects for steel companies, 5 systems for public transport
in Sao Paulo (the second biggest city in the world), 9 automation projects for sugar
and alcohol production, 5 modernisation master plans for companies, and 4
technology departments implementation. An extensive list of projects is available in
my homepage:
www.geocities.com/jamwer2002
Books
Werner,J.C.; "Active Noise Control in ducts using genetic algorithms." (in
Portuguese) PhD Thesis at Mechanical Engineering Department - Polytechnic
School/S? Paulo University, 1999, with CNPq scholarship.
Werner,J.C.; "Nuclear structure effect in O16+Ti 46,50 scattering." (in Portuguese)
MSc Dissertation at Physics Institute/S? Paulo University, 1984, with CNPq
scholarship.
International Conference papers
Werner,J.C.; Kalganova,J.C.; "Risk Evaluation using Evolvable Discriminate
Function." ECML/PKDD2003 Discovery Challenge.
Kalganova,T.; Karol, I.M.; Werner,J.C.; Silkou,N.I.; Lipnitskaya,N.G.; "Probability
prediction method of throat cancer with use of discriminate function" (in Russian) 2nd
International Belarusian-Polish Conference on Otorhinolaryngology: Actual Problems
in Otorhinolaryngology, Grodno, 29-30 May 2003
Werner,J.C.; Kalganova,J.C.; "Disease modeling using Evolved Discriminate
Function". LNCS 2610, Proceedings 6th European Conference, EuroGP 2003, Essex,
UK, April 14-16, 2003.
Werner,J.C.; Fogarty,T.C.; "Severe diseases diagnostics using Genetic Programming."
Intelligent Data Analysis in medicine and pharmacology - IDAMAP2001; September
4th, 2001 London

200512F_CLTHE_Full

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to 200512F_CLTHE_Full

Similar to 200512F_CLTHE_Full (20)

200512F_CLTHE_Full