Collaborative versus individual problem solving in computational thinking through programming: A meta‐analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyan Lai ◽  
Gary Ka‐wai Wong
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Computational Thinking

Computational thinking in K-12 education. An insight through meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
José Miguel Merino-Armero ◽  
José Antonio González-Calero ◽  
Ramón Cózar-Gutiérrez
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Computational Thinking ◽  
K 12

The Interplay Between Mathematical and Computational Thinking in Primary School Students’ Mathematical Problem-Solving Within a Programming Environment

2021 ◽  
pp. 073563312097993
Author(s):  
Zhihao Cui ◽  
Oi-Lam Ng
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Mathematical Thinking ◽  
Mathematics Learning ◽  
Mathematical Problem ◽  
Computational Thinking ◽  
Programming Environment ◽  
Primary School Students ◽  
School Students ◽  
Mathematical Concepts ◽  
Block Based

In this paper, we explore the challenges experienced by a group of Primary 5 to 6 (age 12–14) students as they engaged in a series of problem-solving tasks through block-based programming. The challenges were analysed according to a taxonomy focusing on the presence of computational thinking (CT) elements in mathematics contexts: preparing problems, programming, create computational abstractions, as well as troubleshooting and debugging. Our results suggested that the challenges experienced by students were compounded by both having to learn the CT-based environment as well as to apply mathematical concepts and problem solving in that environment. Possible explanations for the observed challenges stemming from differences between CT and mathematical thinking are discussed in detail, along with suggestions towards improving the effectiveness of integrating CT into mathematics learning. This study provides evidence-based directions towards enriching mathematics education with computation.

scholarly journals Brief Psychotherapy for Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason A. Nieuwsma ◽  
Ranak B. Trivedi ◽  
Jennifer McDuffie ◽  
Ian Kronish ◽  
Dinesh Benjamin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Brief Psychotherapy ◽  
Problem Solving Therapy

Objective: Because evidence-based psychotherapies of 12 to 20 sessions can be perceived as too lengthy and time intensive for the treatment of depression in primary care, a number of studies have examined abbreviated psychotherapy protocols. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy of brief psychotherapy (i.e., < 8 sessions) for depression. Methods: We used combined literature searches in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and an Internet-accessible database of clinical trials of psychotherapy to conduct two systematic searches: one for existing systematic reviews and another for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Included studies examined evidence-based psychotherapy(s) of eight or fewer sessions, focused on adults with depression, contained an acceptable control condition, were published in English, and used validated measures of depressive symptoms. Results: We retained 2 systematic reviews and 15 RCTs evaluating cognitive behavioral therapy, problem-solving therapy, and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy. The systematic reviews found brief psychotherapies to be more efficacious than control, with effect sizes ranging from −0.33 to −0.25. Our meta-analysis found six to eight sessions of cognitive behavioral therapy to be more efficacious than control (ES −0.42, 95% CI −0.74 to −0.10, I2 = 56%). A sensitivity analysis controlled for statistical heterogeneity but showed smaller treatment effects (ES −0.24, 95% CI −0.42 to −0.06, I2 = 0%). Conclusions: Depression can be efficaciously treated with six to eight sessions of psychotherapy, particularly cognitive behavioral therapy and problem-solving therapy. Access to non-pharmacologic treatments for depression could be improved by training healthcare providers to deliver brief psychotherapies.

scholarly journals A contextualização no ensino de matemática: concepções e práticas Contextualizationin the teaching of mathematics: conceptions and practices

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Queli Reis ◽  
Cátia Maria Nehring
Keyword(s):  
Mathematics Education ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Public Policies ◽  
Teaching Of Mathematics

Resumo Este artigo objetiva apresentar um panorama sobre a contextualização através de uma meta análise de pesquisas que tratam deste conceito. Consideramos pesquisas que abordam a contextualização a partir de sua proposição pelas políticas públicas, através de documentos, livros didáticos e avaliações, bem como as concepções e práticas desenvolvidas por professores e pesquisadores da educação matemática. As análises evidenciam um distanciamento entre o que é compreendido epistemologicamente e a prática em sala de aula. A fragilidade de entendimentos sobre o que é contextualização tem limitado o ensino à resolução de problemas e aplicação, simplificando conceitos no processo de ensino e aprendizagem por não enfatizarem o processo de abstração decorrente da contextualização. Abstract This paper aims to present an overview of the contextualization through a meta-analysis of researches, which deal with this concept. We consider researches that address the contextualization from its proposition by public policies through documents, textbooks and assessments, as well as the conceptions and practices developed by teachers and researchers of mathematics education. The analyses have shown a gap between what is epistemologically understood and practice in the classroom. The weakness in understanding what is contextualization has limited teaching to problem solving and application, simplifying concepts in the process of teaching and learning due to not emphasizing the abstraction process arising from the contextualization.

Systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis of the efficacy, safety, and biological effects of psychostimulants and atomoxetine in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 479-495 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Solmi ◽  
Michele Fornaro ◽  
Kuniyoshi Toyoshima ◽  
Andrè F. Carvalho ◽  
Cristiano A. Köhler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Executive Functions ◽  
Negative Symptoms ◽  
Biological Effects ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cortical Activation ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Relapse Prediction

ObjectiveOur aim was to summarize the efficacy and safety of atomoxetine, amphetamines, and methylphenidate in schizophrenia.MethodsWe undertook a systematic review, searching PubMed/Scopus/Clinicaltrials.gov for double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of psychostimulants or atomoxetine in schizophrenia published up to 1 January 2017. A meta-analysis of outcomes reported in two or more studies is presented.ResultsWe included 22 studies investigating therapeutic effects of stimulants (k=14) or measuring symptomatic worsening/relapse prediction after stimulant challenge (k=6). Six studies of these two groups plus one additional study investigated biological effects of psychostimulants or atomoxetine. No effect resulted from interventional studies on weight loss (k=1), smoking cessation (k=1), and positive symptoms (k=12), and no improvement was reported with atomoxetine (k=3) for negative symptoms, with equivocal findings for negative (k=6) and mood symptoms (k=2) with amphetamines. Attention, processing speed, working memory, problem solving, and executive functions, among others, showed from no to some improvement with atomoxetine (k=3) or amphetamines (k=6). Meta-analysis did not confirm any effect of stimulants in any symptom domain, including negative symptoms, apart from atomoxetine improving problem solving (k=2, standardized mean difference (SMD)=0.73, 95% CI=0.10–1.36,p=0.02, I2=0%), and trending toward significant improvement in executive functions with amphetamines (k=2, SMD=0.80, 95% CI=−1.68 to +0.08,p=0.08, I2=66%). In challenge studies, amphetamines (k=1) did not worsen symptoms, and methylphenidate (k=5) consistently worsened or predicted relapse. Biological effects of atomoxetine (k=1) and amphetamines (k=1) were cortical activation, without change in β-endorphin (k=1), improved response to antipsychotics after amphetamine challenge (k=2), and an increase of growth hormone–mediated psychosis with methylphenidate (k=2). No major side effects were reported (k=6).ConclusionsNo efficacy for stimulants or atomoxetine on negative symptoms is proven. Atomoxetine or amphetamines may improve cognitive symptoms, while methylphenidate should be avoided in patients with schizophrenia. Insufficient evidence is available to draw firm conclusions.

Deriving a Gamified Learning-Design Framework Towards Sustainable Community Engagement and Mashable Innovations in Smart Cities

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chien-Sing Lee ◽  
Kuok-Shoong Daniel Wong
Keyword(s):  
High School Students ◽  
Community Engagement ◽  
Success Factors ◽  
Smart Cities ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Computational Thinking ◽  
School Students ◽  
Art And Design ◽  
Gamified Learning ◽  
Design Factors

Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) and the inclusion of art and design into STEM (STEAM) as a mediator are increasingly emphasized in innovation and entrepreneurial blueprints across countries due to smart cities. Knowledge creation/construction towards a thriving ecosystem however, is not a given. This exploratory study aims to derive design factors for community engagement and possible mashable opportunities/innovations in smart city communities. We present a meta-analysis of two gamified media-model maker opportunities carried out among Malaysian high school students. These are designed based on computational thinking and different design theories which take into account: a) deriving design factors/requirements (success factors) and barriers to gamified learning; b) mapping and intertwining of different models as genetic blueprint for gamified learning; c) refinement of the authors' socio-cognitive-HCI framework; d) possibilities for personalized inclusive design.

scholarly journals The Big Why of Implementing Computational Thinking In STEM Education: A Systematic Literature Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 272-289
Author(s):  
Norhafizan Abdul Wahab ◽  
Othman Talib ◽  
Fazilah Razali ◽  
Nurzatulshima Kamarudin
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Stem Education ◽  
Systematic Literature Review ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Computational Thinking ◽  
Considerable Effect ◽  
Research Gaps ◽  
Prisma Statement

Computational Thinking (CT) has been increasingly embraced as a reformation in STEM education. This paper discusses why the implementation of CT would have a considerable effect on STEM education. The first objective of this systematic literature review is to identify the subjects that incorporate the most elements of CT in STEM education. Secondly, it aims to provide an overview of CT practices in the classrooms. Finally, the major findings of this study seek to discuss the benefits and challenges of the use of CT in STEM education. Fifteen articles were methodically selected from Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, and Google Scholar databases as the relevant studies to be discussed in this systematic study, based on the PRISMA Statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) review technique. This review identifies current research gaps and directions for the practice and implementation of CT in STEM education. Further analysis of the articles has contributed to a conclusion that CT has become more widespread and multi-disciplinary and seems to have propagated improvements in STEM education. Still, a new study is required, especially on long-term implications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document