Challenges of Assessing Collaborative Problem Solving

Graesser, Arthur C.; Foltz, Peter W.; Rosen, Yigal; Shaffer, David Williamson; Forsyth, Carol

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-65368-6_5

Cited by 42 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Extensive research shows learning technologies have the capacity to enhance learning. AR visualizations-the ability to overlay computer information onto the real world in real-time shared by multiple users-are critical in developing the next generation of computer-based learning environments [5,6,11,12,22]. Unlike computer interfaces drawing users away from the real world, AR technology enables interaction with the real world in ways never before possible [3].…”

Section: Goals Of the Multi-phase Approach To This Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immersive Learning for Sustainable Building Design and Construction Practices

Messadi¹,

Newman²,

Braham³

et al. 2017

JCEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Educational opportunities for students addressing issues in sustainable built environments are evolving with new learning approaches. Our study asked if technology mediated learning environments using AR (augmented reality) can enhance student learning in the architecture and engineering disciplines. There were multiple study sites, two of them University of Arkansas and Florida International University are discussed. At each site, three collaborative projects were assigned to student teams during fall 2016. Students analyzed an existing building and developed alternative solutions based on improving energy performance. Our paper presents: (1) the research challenge related to the integration of immersive head-mounted display technology providing visual simulations and interactive lessons for interdisciplinary collaboration; and (2) the progress of Phase 1 consisting of our control group results run without the use of AR technology.

show abstract

Section: Goals Of the Multi-phase Approach To This Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immersive Learning for Sustainable Building Design and Construction Practices

Messadi¹,

Newman²,

Braham³

et al. 2017

JCEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To ensure valid measurement on the individual level, each student should be paired with partners displaying various ranges of CPS characteristics (Graesser et al 2015). This way each individual student will be situated fairly similarly to be able to show his or her proficiency in CPS.…”

Section: Assessing Collaborative Problem Solving Skillsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Computer-based assessment of CPS involves the need for advancements in educational assessment methodologies and technology. Group composition, discourse management, and the use of computer agents, are considered as the major challenges in designing valid, reliable, and scalable assessment of CPS skills (Graesser et al 2015). The paper addresses these challenges by studying student CPS performance in two modes of CPS assessment.…”

Section: Human-to-human and Human-to-agent Approach In Cps Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The target CPS skills for this assessment consisted of shared understanding, taking appropriate actions to solve the problem, establishing and maintaining group organization, and providing feedback (e.g., OECD 2013; Graesser et al 2015). In line with CPS dimensions, scores for student performance in the assessment task broken down as being: shared understanding (40 points), problem solving (26 points), and group organization represented by monitoring progress (26 points) and providing feedback (8 points).…”

Section: Scoring Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Computer-based Assessment of Collaborative Problem Solving: Exploring the Feasibility of Human-to-Agent Approach

Rosen

2015

Int J Artif Intell Educ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How can activities in which collaborative skills of an individual are measured be standardized? In order to understand how students perform on collaborative problem solving (CPS) computer-based assessment, it is necessary to examine empirically the multi-faceted performance that may be distributed across collaboration methods. Theaim of this study was to explore possible differences in student performance in humanto-agent (H-A), compared to human-to-human (H-H) CPS assessment tasks. One hundred seventy nine 14 years-old students from the United States, Singapore and Israel participated in the study. Students in both H-H and H-A modes were able to collaborate and communicate by using identical methods and resources. However, while in the H-A mode, students collaborated with a simulated computerdriven partner, and in the H-H mode students collaborated with another student to solve a problem. Overall, the findings showed that CPS with a computer agent involved significantly higher levels of shared understanding, progress monitoring, and feedback. However, no significant difference was found in a student's ability to solve the problem or in student motivation with a computer agent or a human partner. One major implication of CPS score difference in collaboration measures between the two modes is that in H-A mode one can program a wider range of interaction possibilities than would be available with a human partner. Thus, H-A approach offers more opportunities for students to demonstrate their CPS skills. This study is among the first of its kind to investigate systematically the effect of collaborative problem solving in standardized assessment settings.

show abstract

“…Theorists argue that as learners are exposed to the types of problems that practitioners face, they will be more likely to learn the concepts (Jonassen, 1997), and they will be better prepared for their future careers (Hartling, Spooner, Tjosvold, & Oswald, 2010). When compared with the didactic approach that emphasizes rote memorization, the ill-structured nature of the problem also allows learners to engage in higher-order learning skills, such as information-seeking, questioning (Graesser et al, 2018), hypothesis generation, argumentation (Ju & Choi, 2017), and decisionmaking (Wilder, 2015). They garner additional skills in terms of flexible knowledge, collaborative problem-solving (Hmelo-Silver & DeSimone, 2013), and an increased motivation (Schmidt, Rotgans, & Yew, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%