MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396832344 · doi:10.1145/3613904.3641985

Time-Turner: A Bichronous Learning Environment to Support Positive In-class Multitasking of Online Learners

2024· article· en· W4396832344 on OpenAlexaff
Sahar Mavali, Dongwook Yoon, Luanne Sinnamon, Sidney Fels

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPersonal Information Management and User Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman multitaskingSummative assessmentAsynchronous communicationClass (philosophy)Computer scienceScope (computer science)Formative assessmentLearning environmentPerceptionMultimediaPsychologyMathematics educationCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

University students engage in a substantial amount of multitasking in online classes despite being aware of its negative impacts on their learning. Depending on the learner’s goals, in-class multitasking can be a positive strategic behavior to increase productivity. In a formative pilot study (N=10), we established the structure and scope for our design by exploring students’ motivations, perceptions, and challenges in in-class multitasking and identified several promising design elements. Our design facilitates multitasking in online synchronous classes by providing a novel bichronous (blending of synchronous and asynchronous) learning environment manifested in Time-Turner that enables asynchronous guided accelerated viewing of past content during synchronous classes. A summative evaluation of our prototype showed significant improvement in learning outcomes when multitasking (N=20). Furthermore, 95% of users found Time-Turner helpful and expressed interest in having it in their online classes. Our findings show the great potential of supporting positive multitasking in synchronous online classes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.291 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorFrench-language works237,207