skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Title: Different approaches to collaborative problem solving between successful versus less successful problem solvers: Tracking changes of knowledge structure
Award ID(s):
1918751
PAR ID:
10387753
Author(s) / Creator(s):
;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Journal of Research on Technology in Education
ISSN:
1539-1523
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Mitrovic, Antonija; Bosch, Nigel (Ed.)
    In collaborative problem solving (CPS), people's actions are interactive, interdependent, and temporal. However, it is unclear how actions temporally relate to each other and what are the temporal similarities and differences between successful vs. unsuccessful CPS processes. As such, we apply a temporal analysis approach, Multilevel Vector Autoregression (mlVAR) to investigate CPS processes. Our data were collected from college students who collaborated in triads via a video-conferencing tool (Zoom) to collaborately engage a physics learning game. Video recordings of their verbal interactions were transcribed, coded using a validated CPS framework, and organized into sequences of 10-second windows. Then, mlVAR was applied to the successful vs. unsuccessful CPS sequences to build temporal models for each. A comparison of the models together with a qualitative analysis of the transcripts revealed six temporal relationships common to both, six unique to successful level attempts, and another eight unique to unsuccessful level attempts only. Generally, for successful outcomes, people were likely to answer clarification questions with reasons and to ask for suggestions according to the current game situation, while for unsuccessful CPS level attempts, people were more likely to struggle with unclear instructions and to respond to inappropriate ideas. Overall, our results suggest that mlVAR is an effective approach for temporal analyses of CPS processes by identifying relationships that go beyond a coding and counting approach. 
    more » « less
  2. Due to a growing interest in deep learning applications [5], compute-intensive and long-running (hours to days) training jobs have become a significant component of datacenter workloads. A large fraction of these jobs is often exploratory, with the goal of determining the best model structure (e.g., the number of layers and channels in a convolutional neural network), hyperparameters (e.g., the learning rate), and data augmentation strategies for the target application. Notably, training jobs are often terminated early if their learning metrics (e.g., training and validation accuracy) are not converging, with only a few completing successfully. For this motivating application, we consider the problem of scheduling a set of jobs that can be terminated at predetermined checkpoints with known probabilities estimated from historical data. We prove that, in order to minimize the time to complete the first K successful jobs on a single server, optimal scheduling does not require preemption (even when preemption overhead is negligible) and provide an optimal policy; advantages of this policy are quantified through simulation. Related Work. While job scheduling has been investigated extensively in many scenarios (see [6] and [2] for a survey of recent result), most policies require that the cost of waiting times of each job be known at scheduling time; in contrast, in our setting the scheduler does not know which job will be the K-th successful job, and sojourn times of subsequent jobs do not contribute to the target metric. For example, [4, 3] minimize makespan (i.e., the time to complete all jobs) for known execution times and waiting time costs; similarly, Gittins index [1] and SR rank [7] minimize expected sojourn time of all jobs, i.e., both successfully completed jobs and jobs terminated early. Unfortunately, scheduling policies not distinguishing between these two types of jobs may favor jobs where the next stage is short and leads to early termination with high probability, which is an undesirable outcome in our applications of interest. 
    more » « less
  3. Abstract Forming memories requires a focus on the external world; retrieving memories requires attention to our internal world. Computational models propose that the hippocampus resolves the tension between encoding and retrieval by alternating between states that prioritize one over the other. We asked whether the success of a retrieval state affects the success of an encoding state, when both are measured in behavior. Across 3 Experiments (N = 197), we operationalized retrieval as the use of memories to make predictions about the future, and tested whether successful (vs. unsuccessful) prediction affected the likelihood of successful encoding. Participants viewed a series of scene categories that contained structure (e.g., beaches are followed by castles), which enabled memory retrieval to guide prediction. After structure learning, they completed a simultaneous prediction and encoding task. They were shown trial-unique category exemplars and made predictions about upcoming scene categories. Finally, participants completed a surprise memory test for the trial-unique images. Accurate (vs. inaccurate) predictions were associated with better encoding, and increasing prediction distance hurt both prediction and encoding. This association between encoding and prediction could not be explained by generic on- vs. off-task states. We propose that, in addition to stimulus and endogenous factors that modulate switches between encoding and retrieval, the success of one state can facilitate a switch to the other. Thus, although encoding and prediction depend on distinct and competitive computational mechanisms, the success of one in behavior can increase the likelihood of success for the other. 
    more » « less