988 resultados para business games
Resumo:
Background There is some apparent confusion regarding similarities and differences between two popular physical education (PE) pedagogical frameworks, that is, the Constraints-Led Approach (CLA) and Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU). Purpose Our aim in this commentary is to detail important theoretical and pedagogical concepts that distinguish these approaches, as well as to recognise where commonalities exist. Findings In particular, we note that TGfU had its roots in the 1960s in the absence of a substantial theoretical framework, although several attempts to retrospectively scaffold theories around TGfU have subsequently emerged in the literature. TGfU is a learner-centred approach to PE in which teachers are encouraged to design modified games to develop the learner's understanding of tactical concepts. In contrast, the CLA has arisen more recently from the umbrella of Nonlinear Pedagogy (NLP), emerging from the empirically rich theoretical framework of ecological dynamics. The CLA adopts a ‘learner–environment’ scale of analysis in which practitioners are encouraged to identify and modify interacting constraints (of task, environment and learner) to facilitate the coupling of each learner's perceptual and action systems during learning. The CLA is a broader framework which has been adapted for the design of (re)learning environments in PE, sport and movement therapy. Other key distinctions between the approaches include: the overall goals; the way in which the learner and the learning process are modelled; the use of questioning as a pedagogical tool; the focus on individual differences vs. generic concepts; and how progressions and skill interjections are planned and implemented. Conclusions Despite such distinctions, the two approaches are somewhat harmonious and key similarities include: their holistic perspective of the learner; the proposed role of the teacher and the design characteristics of learning tasks in each. Both TGfU and the CLA have a powerful central focus on the nature of learning activities undertaken by each individual learner. This clarification of TGFU and the CLA is intended to act as a catalyst for more empirical work into the complementarity of these juxtaposed pedagogical approaches to learning design.
Resumo:
This article presents a method for checking the conformance between an event log capturing the actual execution of a business process, and a model capturing its expected or normative execution. Given a business process model and an event log, the method returns a set of statements in natural language describing the behavior allowed by the process model but not observed in the log and vice versa. The method relies on a unified representation of process models and event logs based on a well-known model of concurrency, namely event structures. Specifically, the problem of conformance checking is approached by folding the input event log into an event structure, unfolding the process model into another event structure, and comparing the two event structures via an error-correcting synchronized product. Each behavioral difference detected in the synchronized product is then verbalized as a natural language statement. An empirical evaluation shows that the proposed method scales up to real-life datasets while producing more concise and higher-level difference descriptions than state-of-the-art conformance checking methods.
Resumo:
Digital Image
Resumo:
Loaned for duplication by Renate Feuchtwanger
Resumo:
Digital Image
View of Paul I. Landmann manufacturing factory; Mannheim-Neckarau Business Establishments; Factories
Resumo:
"Fabrikansicht"
Resumo:
"Drucksaal 1"
Resumo:
"Umdruckerei"
Resumo:
"Pragesaal"
Resumo:
"Atelier und Buero"
Resumo:
"Fabrikansicht von der Toreinfahrt"
Resumo:
"Arbeiter und Mietshaeuser"
Resumo:
"Arbeiter und Mietshaeuser"