MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2934172607

The Role of Flow in Learning Distributed Computing and MapReduce Concepts using Hands-On Analogy

2019· article· en· W2934172607 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Colin Conrad, Michael Bliemel, Hossam Ali‐Hassan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association for Information Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaKillam Trusts
KeywordsAnalogyComputer scienceFlow (mathematics)Mathematics educationArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsEpistemologyPhilosophyGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The expansion of technical concepts into everyday business practices suggests a need for effectively teaching difficult subjects to non-technical users. This paper describes hands-on analogy, an innovative method for teaching technically difficult concepts using interactive, experiential learning activities and a gamified exercise. We demonstrate our technique by investigating Hadoop Hands On, an exercise designed to teach MapReduce. Students experienced how MapReduce functions work conceptually by envisioning students as compute and tracking nodes in a Hadoop system and playing cards as data processed to complete two tasks of varying complexity. A study of 56 students was conducted to validate the exercise and demonstrated the impact of triggered flow on perceived understanding. The main contributions of this work are 1) an alternative learning approach that communicates a technically difficult concept through analogy and 2) the demonstration of the role of flow in facilitating learning using this approach. We recommend using this approach to teach technically difficult concepts to non-technical students who can more easily comprehend the benefits of distributed computing methods interactively in a way that complements the traditional lecture approach.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association for Information SystemsSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207