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

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 computer-driven 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.

[1]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Is it an Agent, or Just a Program?: A Taxonomy for Autonomous Agents , 1996, ATAL.

[2]  M. Scheerer,et al.  Problem Solving , 1967, Nature.

[3]  Yigal Rosen,et al.  Using a Collaborative Database to Enhance Students’ Knowledge Construction , 2009 .

[4]  Christine E. DeMars,et al.  Low Examinee Effort in Low-Stakes Assessment: Problems and Potential Solutions , 2005 .

[5]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Operation ARIES!: A Serious Game for Teaching Scientific Inquiry , 2011, Serious Games and Edutainment Applications.

[6]  Elliot Aronson,et al.  Cooperation in the Classroom: The Jigsaw Method , 2011 .

[7]  Allen Newell,et al.  Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .

[8]  Stephen M. Fiore,et al.  Toward an Understanding of Macrocognition in Teams: Predicting Processes in Complex Collaborative Contexts , 2010, Hum. Factors.

[9]  Arthur C. Graesser,et al.  Agent Technologies Designed to Facilitate Interactive Knowledge Construction , 2008 .

[10]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches , 1999 .

[11]  Stephen M. Fiore,et al.  Process mapping and shared cognition: Teamwork and the development of shared problem models. , 2004 .

[12]  M. Scardamalia Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge , 2002 .

[13]  Gautam Biswas,et al.  Measuring Self-Regulated Learning Skills through Social Interactions in a teachable Agent Environment , 2010, Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn..

[14]  Richard Hartshorne,et al.  Teacher Education Programs and Online Learning Tools: Innovations in Teacher Preparation , 2012 .

[15]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Sharing Solutions: Persistence and Grounding in Multimodal Collaborative Problem Solving , 2006 .

[16]  F. Fischer,et al.  A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[17]  Stephanie D. Teasley,et al.  The Construction of Shared Knowledge in Collaborative Problem Solving , 1995 .

[18]  Joachim Funke,et al.  Complex problem solving: a case for complex cognition? , 2010, Cognitive Processing.

[19]  Jessica L. Wildman,et al.  Trust Development in Swift Starting Action Teams , 2012 .

[20]  Yigal Rosen,et al.  The Effects of an Animation-Based On-Line Learning Environment on Transfer of Knowledge and on Motivation for Science and Technology Learning , 2009 .

[21]  Yigal Rosen,et al.  Teaching and Assessing Problem Solving in Online Collaborative Environment , 2013 .

[22]  Patrick Griffin,et al.  The Changing Role of Education and Schools , 2012 .

[23]  Gregory K. W. K. Chung,et al.  Computer-Based Collaborative Knowledge Mapping To Measure Team Processes and Team Outcomes. , 1999 .

[24]  D. Klahr,et al.  All other things being equal: acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. , 1999, Child development.

[25]  PISA 2015 collaborative problem ‐ solving framework , 2022 .

[26]  Yigal Rosen,et al.  Complexity of Social Interactions in Collaborative Learning: The Case of Online Database Environment , 2010 .

[27]  Donna L. Sundre,et al.  An exploration of the psychology of the examinee: Can examinee self-regulation and test-taking motivation predict consequential and non-consequential test performance? , 2004 .

[28]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Problem-solving transfer. , 1996 .

[29]  M. Peters,et al.  Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology , 2011 .

[30]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  Interactivity and Expectation: Eliciting Learning Oriented Behavior with Tutorial Dialogue Systems , 2005, INTERACT.

[31]  Harold F. O'Neil,et al.  Workforce Readiness: Competencies and Assessment. , 1997 .

[32]  Eva L. Baker,et al.  Computer-Based Feedback for Computer-Based Collaborative Problem Solving , 2010 .

[33]  Regina Vollmeyer,et al.  Motivation and metacognition when learning a complex system , 1999 .

[34]  付伶俐 打磨Using Language,倡导新理念 , 2014 .

[35]  S. Ian Robertson,et al.  Problem-solving , 2001, Human Thinking.

[36]  Steven L. Wise,et al.  An Application of Item Response Time: The Effort‐Moderated IRT Model , 2006 .

[37]  Harold F. O'Neil,et al.  Use of networked simulations as a context to measure team competencies , 1997 .

[38]  N. Webb Group Collaboration in Assessment: Multiple Objectives, Processes, and Outcomes , 1995 .

[39]  San-hui Chuang,et al.  Measuring Collaborative Problem Solving in Low-Stakes Tasks , 2017 .

[40]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technologies , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[41]  Nancy J. Cooke,et al.  Measuring Team Knowledge: A Window to the Cognitive Underpinnings of Team Performance , 2003 .

[42]  Victor Kaptelinin,et al.  Group Cognition Computer Support for Building Collaborative Knowledge , 2007 .

[43]  Donna L. Sundre Does examinee motivation moderate the relationship between test consequences and test performance , 1999 .

[44]  Jiajie Zhang,et al.  A Distributed Representation Approach to Group Problem Solving , 1998, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[45]  Gautam Biswas,et al.  LEARNING BY TEACHING: A NEW AGENT PARADIGM FOR EDUCATIONAL SOFTWARE , 2005, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[46]  Yigal Rosen,et al.  Comparability of Conflict Opportunities in Human-to-Human and Human-to-Agent Online Collaborative Problem Solving , 2014, Technol. Knowl. Learn..

[47]  Joachim Funke,et al.  Negative affective environments improve complex solving performance , 2010 .

[48]  Peter W. Foltz,et al.  Automated Communication Analysis of Teams , 2008 .

[49]  N. Webb,et al.  Group Discussion and Large-Scale Language Arts Assessment: Effects on Students' Comprehension , 2000 .

[50]  Alexander W. Chizhik,et al.  Equity Issues in Collaborative Group Assessment: Group Composition and Performance , 1998 .

[51]  Gautam Biswas,et al.  Designing Learning by Teaching Agents: The Betty's Brain System , 2008, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[52]  Lakhmi C. Jain,et al.  Serious Games and Edutainment Applications , 2014 .

[53]  Dirk Ifenthaler,et al.  Computer-Based Diagnostics and Systematic Analysis of Knowledge , 2010 .

[54]  Hanna Eklöf,et al.  Development and Validation of Scores From an Instrument Measuring Student Test-Taking Motivation , 2006 .

[55]  P. Winne,et al.  Handbook of educational psychology , 2015 .

[56]  Stephen Nicholas,et al.  Knowledge Creation in Groups: The Value of Cognitive Diversity, Transactive Memory, and Openmindedness Norms , 2005, ECKM.

[57]  Yigal Rosen,et al.  Intertwining Digital Content and a One-To-One Laptop Environment in Teaching and Learning , 2012 .

[58]  Candice Burkett,et al.  Trialog in ARIES : User Input Assessment in an Intelligent Tutoring System , 2011 .

[59]  Nikolaos M. Avouris,et al.  On analysis of collaborative problem solving: an object-oriented approach , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[60]  John R. Anderson The Adaptive Character of Thought , 1990 .

[61]  P. Robert Duimering,et al.  A balance theory approach to group problem solving , 2008, Soc. Networks.

[62]  Hsin-Hui Chen,et al.  Assessing Problem Solving in Simulation Games , 2017 .

[63]  I-Lin Gloria Hsieh,et al.  Types of feedback in a computer-based collaborative problem-solving group task , 2002, Comput. Hum. Behav..