Search for: All records

Computational thinking (CT) is key in STEM and computer science (CS) education. Recently, there has been a surge in studies inquiring about the factors that predict the CT development of young students. We extend these prior works by inquiring about the factors that predict the CT of students (n = 932) in a constructionist game-based learning (GBL) STEM curriculum. Specifically, after addressing missing data through imputation, we apply Multilevel Modeling (MLM) to identify these potential factors in Scratch games and students’ CT. We found that teachers’ experience implementing game-based curricula, students’ Scratch experience, student choice of game genre, and the interaction between teacher experience and game genre significantly predicted CT. Instead, students’ gender did not emerge as a significant predictor of CT. We provide recommendations for curricula that support CT through constructionist GBL. 

Students are often tasked in engaging with activities where they have to learn skills that are tangential to the learning outcomes of a course, such as learning a new software. The issue is that instructors may not have the time or the expertise to help students with such tangential learning. In this paper, we explore how AI-generated feedback can provide assistance. Specifically, we study this technology in the context of a constructionist curriculum where students learn about experimental research through the creation of a gamified experiment. The AI-generated feedback gives a formative assessment on the narrative design of student-designed gamified experiments, which is important to create an engaging experience. We find that students critically engaged with the feedback, but that responses varied among students. We discuss the implications for AI-generated feedback systems for tangential learning. 

Abstract Accurately predicting weather and climate in cities is critical for safeguarding human health and strengthening urban resilience. Multimodel evaluations can lead to model improvements; however, there have been no major intercomparisons of urban‐focussed land surface models in over a decade. Here, in Phase 1 of the Urban‐PLUMBER project, we evaluate the ability of 30 land surface models to simulate surface energy fluxes critical to atmospheric meteorological and air quality simulations. We establish minimum and upper performance expectations for participating models using simple information‐limited models as benchmarks. Compared with the last major model intercomparison at the same site, we find broad improvement in the current cohort's predictions of short‐wave radiation, sensible and latent heat fluxes, but little or no improvement in long‐wave radiation and momentum fluxes. Models with a simple urban representation (e.g., ‘slab’ schemes) generally perform well, particularly when combined with sophisticated hydrological/vegetation models. Some mid‐complexity models (e.g., ‘canyon’ schemes) also perform well, indicating efforts to integrate vegetation and hydrology processes have paid dividends. The most complex models that resolve three‐dimensional interactions between buildings in general did not perform as well as other categories. However, these models also tended to have the simplest representations of hydrology and vegetation. Models without any urban representation (i.e., vegetation‐only land surface models) performed poorly for latent heat fluxes, and reasonably for other energy fluxes at this suburban site. Our analysis identified widespread human errors in initial submissions that substantially affected model performances. Although significant efforts are applied to correct these errors, we conclude that human factors are likely to influence results in this (or any) model intercomparison, particularly where participating scientists have varying experience and first languages. These initial results are for one suburban site, and future phases of Urban‐PLUMBER will evaluate models across 20 sites in different urban and regional climate zones. 

We present a new method of automatic critical mechanic discovery for video games using a combination of game description parsing and playtrace information. This method is applied to several games within the General Video Game Artificial Intelligence (GVG-AI) framework. In a user study, human-identified mechanics are compared against system-identified critical mechanics to verify alignment between humans and the system. The results of the study demonstrate that the new method is able to match humans with higher consistency than baseline. Our system is further validated by comparing MCTS agents augmented with critical mechanics and vanilla MCTS agents on 4 games from GVG-AI. Our new playtrace method shows a significant performance improvement over the baseline for all 4 tested games. The proposed method also shows either matched or improved performance over the old method, demonstrating that playtrace information is responsible for more complete critical mechanic discovery.