Abstract:Undergraduate computer science is governed by international curricular guidelines revised about once a decade, yet programs lack a reliable, reproducible way to measure how completely they cover the current guidelines and how that coverage shifts when the guidelines are restructured. We address this with a human-in-the-loop pipeline that measures a program's coverage of an external body of knowledge, applied longitudinally to one accredited BSc in Computer Science against Computer Science Curricula 2013 (CS2013) and 2023 (CS2023). The pipeline represents the program and each guideline as structured corpora, generates candidate course-to-knowledge-unit matches by semantic retrieval, and confirms them through human judgment under an explicit coverage definition. Of seven benchmarked retrievers, a reciprocal-rank-fusion ensemble was strongest, and a reputed long-context model underperformed a small sentence model, so retriever choice must be measured. Both maps were validated by an independent second rater (Cohen's kappa 0.64 for CS2023, 0.69 for CS2013). The program covers 49.7% of CS2023 and 50.9% of CS2013 knowledge units, near-constant across a decade. Extending the same retrieve-then-confirm design to competency articulation and cognitive depth shows that the program articulates the competency for ~88% of covered units under each guideline, yet delivers it at the recommended depth for 76% of present units under CS2023 against 95% under CS2013, a gap reflecting the newer guideline's raised expectations, not the program. The longitudinal comparison separates persistent structural gaps (parallel and distributed computing, foundations of programming languages, systems fundamentals), uncovered against both guidelines and ABET, from differences that reflect the standard's evolution. The instrument is reusable and available from the authors on request.
Abstract:Schema-constrained information extraction from diverse educational and labor-market corpora remains an open challenge in natural language processing because existing pipelines rely primarily on lexical-surface methods that cannot recover implicit competencies, lack grounding in shared taxonomies, and provide no formal measures of extraction reliability or document-level completeness. To address these limitations, this paper proposes a four-stage NLP framework that combines (i) schema-constrained prompting of a two-model frontier-LLM ensemble against a JSON Schema-enforced seven-slot competency formalism, (ii) Sentence-BERT (SBERT) alignment of the extracted records against an eleven-domain ESCO v1.2.1 controlled vocabulary, (iii) a two-tier adjudication protocol that resolves inter-model disagreements, and (iv) a verification mechanism that combines per-slot Cohen's kappa, schema conformance, and document-level completeness audits. The framework is instantiated for a critical application in higher-education quality assurance, namely curriculum-labor market alignment for the ABET-accredited BSc Computer Science program at the United Arab Emirates University. The pipeline extracts 400 competency records from the 85-course 2025-2026 study plan and aligns them, under a five-scope analysis ranging from the computing core to a probability-weighted student trajectory, with 30 job postings (483 requirement clauses) at an SBERT cosine threshold of 0.50. The extractor achieves Cohen's kappa of 0.79 on the skill slot, with 100% schema conformance and 100% document-level completeness. The alignment surfaces interpretable supply-demand gaps of 25.0% in general and transversal skills, 13.8% in algorithms and computational theory, and 12.2% in software engineering and project management, with a near-zero 1.8% gap in artificial intelligence and data science despite 38.6% supply coverage.
Abstract:Understanding learners' cognitive and affective states underpins adaptive educational systems and effective teaching. Although research links nonverbal cues to internal states, no framework calibrates them to evidence. We present the Nonverbal Syntax Framework, drawn from a systematic review of 908 studies and 17,043 cue-state mappings (Turaev et al., 2026). The framework addresses three challenges: terminological fragmentation (behaviors described inconsistently), evidence heterogeneity (single observations to replicated findings), and state ambiguity (similar patterns indicating multiple states). Normalization consolidated 5,537 state labels into 2,010 canonical states (63.7%) and 11,521 cues into 6,434 normalized cues (44.2%) across nine behavioral channels. Dual-evidence assessment separately evaluates Component Evidence (coverage of cues and states) and Relationship Evidence (independent studies per cue-state link). 52% of "Very High" relationships rest on one paper, so separation enables calibrated rather than overconfident inference from preliminary findings. The framework's four levels comprise a Cue Vocabulary of 6,434 indicators classified as observable/instrumental; State Clusters linking 2,010 states to indicative cues; State Profiles with multimodal behavioral signatures and actionable specifications; and Discriminative Analysis distinguishing 1,215 confusable state pairs. We identify 480 actionable R1-R4 relationships (three or more independent papers), the replicated core of six decades of research, covering 35.5% of mappings across 47 key learning states and 111 distinct indicators. The remaining 91.5% (9,653 single-paper findings) form exploratory hypotheses for replication. The framework gives researchers an empirical foundation for identifying gaps, practitioners evidence-based tools for state inference, and technologists validated features for multimodal detection.