computer problem solving test

• Get started with computers
• Learn Microsoft Office
• Apply for a job
• Improve my work skills
• Design nice-looking docs
• Getting Started
• Smartphones & Tablets
• Typing Tutorial
• Online Learning
• Basic Internet Skills
• Online Safety
• Social Media
• Zoom Basics
• Google Docs
• Google Sheets
• Career Planning
• Resume Writing
• Cover Letters
• Job Search and Networking
• Business Communication
• Entrepreneurship 101
• Careers without College
• Job Hunt for Today
• 3D Printing
• Freelancing 101
• Personal Finance
• Sharing Economy
• Decision-Making
• Graphic Design
• Photography
• Image Editing
• Learning WordPress
• Language Learning
• Critical Thinking
• For Educators
• Translations
• Staff Picks
• English expand_more expand_less

Computer Basics  - Basic Troubleshooting Techniques

Computer basics  -, basic troubleshooting techniques, computer basics basic troubleshooting techniques.

Computer Basics: Basic Troubleshooting Techniques

Lesson 19: basic troubleshooting techniques.

/en/computerbasics/creating-a-safe-workspace/content/

Troubleshooting

Do you know what to do if your screen goes blank? What if you can't seem to close an application, or can't hear any sound from your speakers? Whenever you have a problem with your computer, don't panic! There are many basic troubleshooting techniques you can use to fix issues like this. In this lesson, we'll show you some simple things to try when troubleshooting, as well as how to solve common problems you may encounter.

General tips to keep in mind

There are many different things that could cause a problem with your computer. No matter what's causing the issue, troubleshooting will always be a process of trial and error —in some cases, you may need to use several different approaches before you can find a solution; other problems may be easy to fix. We recommend starting by using the following tips.

• Write down your steps : Once you start troubleshooting, you may want to write down each step you take. This way, you'll be able to remember exactly what you've done and can avoid repeating the same mistakes. If you end up asking other people for help, it will be much easier if they know exactly what you've tried already.
• Take notes about error messages : If your computer gives you an error message , be sure to write down as much information as possible. You may be able to use this information later to find out if other people are having the same error.

• Restart the computer : When all else fails, restarting the computer is a good thing to try. This can solve a lot of basic issues you may experience with your computer.

Using the process of elimination

If you're having an issue with your computer, you may be able to find out what's wrong using the process of elimination . This means you'll make a list of things that could be causing the problem and then test them out one by one to eliminate them. Once you've identified the source of your computer issue, it will be easier to find a solution.

Let's say you're trying to print out invitations for a birthday party, but the printer won't print. You have some ideas about what could be causing this, so you go through them one by one to see if you can eliminate any possible causes.

First, you check the printer to see that it's turned on and plugged in to the surge protector . It is, so that's not the issue. Next, you check to make sure the printer's ink cartridge still has ink and that there is paper loaded in the paper tray . Things look good in both cases, so you know the issue has nothing to do with ink or paper.

Now you want to make sure the printer and computer are communicating correctly . If you recently downloaded an update to your operating system , it might interfere with the printer. But you know there haven't been any recent updates and the printer was working yesterday, so you'll have to look elsewhere.

You check the printer's USB cord and find that it's not plugged in. You must have unplugged it accidentally when you plugged something else into the computer earlier. Once you plug in the USB cord, the printer starts working again. It looks like this printer issue is solved!

This is just one example of an issue you might encounter while using a computer. In the rest of this lesson, we'll talk about other common computer problems and some ways to solve them.

Simple solutions to common problems

Most of the time, problems can be fixed using simple troubleshooting techniques, like closing and reopening the program. It's important to try these simple solutions before resorting to more extreme measures. If the problem still isn't fixed, you can try other troubleshooting techniques.

Problem: Power button will not start computer

• Solution 1 : If your computer does not start , begin by checking the power cord to confirm that it is plugged securely into the back of the computer case and the power outlet.
• Solution 2 : If it is plugged into an outlet, make sure it is a working outlet . To check your outlet, you can plug in another electrical device , such as a lamp .

• Solution 4 : If you are using a laptop , the battery may not be charged. Plug the AC adapter into the wall, then try to turn on the laptop. If it still doesn't start up, you may need to wait a few minutes and try again.

Problem: An application is running slowly

• Solution 1 : Close and reopen the application.

Problem: An application is frozen

Sometimes an application may become stuck, or frozen . When this happens, you won't be able to close the window or click any buttons within the application.

• Solution 2 : Restart the computer. If you are unable to force quit an application, restarting your computer will close all open apps.

Problem: All programs on the computer run slowly

• Solution 2 : Your computer may be running out of hard drive space. Try deleting any files or programs you don't need.
• Solution 3 : If you're using a PC , you can run Disk Defragmenter . To learn more about Disk Defragmenter , check out our lesson on Protecting Your Computer .

Problem: The computer is frozen

Sometimes your computer may become completely unresponsive, or frozen . When this happens, you won't be able to click anywhere on the screen, open or close applications, or access shut-down options.

• Solution 3 : Press and hold the Power button. The Power button is usually located on the front or side of the computer, typically indicated by the power symbol . Press and hold the Power button for 5 to 10 seconds to force the computer to shut down.
• Solution 4 : If the computer still won't shut down, you can unplug the power cable from the electrical outlet. If you're using a laptop, you may be able to remove the battery to force the computer to turn off. Note : This solution should be your last resort after trying the other suggestions above.

Problem: The mouse or keyboard has stopped working

• Solution 2 : If you're using a wireless mouse or keyboard, make sure it's turned on and that its batteries are charged.

Problem: The sound isn't working

• Solution 1 : Check the volume level. Click the audio button in the top-right or bottom-right corner of the screen to make sure the sound is turned on and that the volume is up.
• Solution 2 : Check the audio player controls. Many audio and video players will have their own separate audio controls. Make sure the sound is turned on and that the volume is turned up in the player.
• Solution 3 : Check the cables. Make sure external speakers are plugged in, turned on, and connected to the correct audio port or a USB port. If your computer has color-coded ports, the audio output port will usually be green .

Problem: The screen is blank

• Solution 1 : The computer may be in Sleep mode. Click the mouse or press any key on the keyboard to wake it.
• Solution 2 : Make sure the monitor is plugged in and turned on .
• Solution 3 : Make sure the computer is plugged in and turned on .
• Solution 4 : If you're using a desktop, make sure the monitor cable is properly connected to the computer tower and the monitor.

Solving more difficult problems

If you still haven't found a solution to your problem, you may need to ask someone else for help. As an easy starting point, we'd recommend searching the Web . It's possible that other users have had similar problems, and solutions to these problems are often posted online. Also, if you have a friend or family member who knows a lot about computers, they may be able to help you.

Keep in mind that most computer problems have simple solutions, although it may take some time to find them. For difficult problems, a more drastic solution may be required, like reformatting your hard drive or reinstalling your operating system. If you think you might need a solution like this, we recommend consulting a professional first. If you're not a computer expert, it's possible that attempting these solutions could make the situation worse.

/en/computerbasics/how-to-use-your-computers-builtin-help/content/

• Brain Development
• Childhood & Adolescence
• Diet & Lifestyle
• Emotions, Stress & Anxiety
• Learning & Memory
• Thinking & Awareness
• Alzheimer's & Dementia
• Childhood Disorders
• Immune System Disorders
• Mental Health
• Neurodegenerative Disorders
• Infectious Disease
• Neurological Disorders A-Z
• Body Systems
• Cells & Circuits
• Genes & Molecules
• The Arts & the Brain
• Law, Economics & Ethics
• Neuroscience in the News
• Supporting Research
• Tech & the Brain
• Animals in Research
• BRAIN Initiative
• Meet the Researcher
• Neuro-technologies
• Tools & Techniques
• Core Concepts
• For Educators
• Ask an Expert
• The Brain Facts Book

Test Your Problem-Solving Skills

Personalize your emails.

Personalize your monthly updates from BrainFacts.org by choosing the topics that you care about most!

Find a Neuroscientist

Engage local scientists to educate your community about the brain.

Image of the Week

Check out the Image of the Week Archive.

SUPPORTING PARTNERS

• Privacy Policy
• Accessibility Policy
• Terms and Conditions
• Manage Cookies

Some pages on this website provide links that require Adobe Reader to view.

What Is Problem Solving? How Software Engineers Approach Complex Challenges

From debugging an existing system to designing an entirely new software application, a day in the life of a software engineer is filled with various challenges and complexities. The one skill that glues these disparate tasks together and makes them manageable? Problem solving . 

Throughout this blog post, we’ll explore why problem-solving skills are so critical for software engineers, delve into the techniques they use to address complex challenges, and discuss how hiring managers can identify these skills during the hiring process. 

What Is Problem Solving?

But what exactly is problem solving in the context of software engineering? How does it work, and why is it so important?

Problem solving, in the simplest terms, is the process of identifying a problem, analyzing it, and finding the most effective solution to overcome it. For software engineers, this process is deeply embedded in their daily workflow. It could be something as simple as figuring out why a piece of code isn’t working as expected, or something as complex as designing the architecture for a new software system. 

In a world where technology is evolving at a blistering pace, the complexity and volume of problems that software engineers face are also growing. As such, the ability to tackle these issues head-on and find innovative solutions is not only a handy skill — it’s a necessity. 

The Importance of Problem-Solving Skills for Software Engineers

Problem-solving isn’t just another ability that software engineers pull out of their toolkits when they encounter a bug or a system failure. It’s a constant, ongoing process that’s intrinsic to every aspect of their work. Let’s break down why this skill is so critical.

Driving Development Forward

Without problem solving, software development would hit a standstill. Every new feature, every optimization, and every bug fix is a problem that needs solving. Whether it’s a performance issue that needs diagnosing or a user interface that needs improving, the capacity to tackle and solve these problems is what keeps the wheels of development turning.

It’s estimated that 60% of software development lifecycle costs are related to maintenance tasks, including debugging and problem solving. This highlights how pivotal this skill is to the everyday functioning and advancement of software systems.

Innovation and Optimization

The importance of problem solving isn’t confined to reactive scenarios; it also plays a major role in proactive, innovative initiatives . Software engineers often need to think outside the box to come up with creative solutions, whether it’s optimizing an algorithm to run faster or designing a new feature to meet customer needs. These are all forms of problem solving.

Consider the development of the modern smartphone. It wasn’t born out of a pre-existing issue but was a solution to a problem people didn’t realize they had — a device that combined communication, entertainment, and productivity into one handheld tool.

Increasing Efficiency and Productivity

Good problem-solving skills can save a lot of time and resources. Effective problem-solvers are adept at dissecting an issue to understand its root cause, thus reducing the time spent on trial and error. This efficiency means projects move faster, releases happen sooner, and businesses stay ahead of their competition.

Improving Software Quality

Problem solving also plays a significant role in enhancing the quality of the end product. By tackling the root causes of bugs and system failures, software engineers can deliver reliable, high-performing software. This is critical because, according to the Consortium for Information and Software Quality, poor quality software in the U.S. in 2022 cost at least $2.41 trillion in operational issues, wasted developer time, and other related problems.

Problem-Solving Techniques in Software Engineering

So how do software engineers go about tackling these complex challenges? Let’s explore some of the key problem-solving techniques, theories, and processes they commonly use.

Decomposition

Breaking down a problem into smaller, manageable parts is one of the first steps in the problem-solving process. It’s like dealing with a complicated puzzle. You don’t try to solve it all at once. Instead, you separate the pieces, group them based on similarities, and then start working on the smaller sets. This method allows software engineers to handle complex issues without being overwhelmed and makes it easier to identify where things might be going wrong.

Abstraction

In the realm of software engineering, abstraction means focusing on the necessary information only and ignoring irrelevant details. It is a way of simplifying complex systems to make them easier to understand and manage. For instance, a software engineer might ignore the details of how a database works to focus on the information it holds and how to retrieve or modify that information.

Algorithmic Thinking

At its core, software engineering is about creating algorithms — step-by-step procedures to solve a problem or accomplish a goal. Algorithmic thinking involves conceiving and expressing these procedures clearly and accurately and viewing every problem through an algorithmic lens. A well-designed algorithm not only solves the problem at hand but also does so efficiently, saving computational resources.

Parallel Thinking

Parallel thinking is a structured process where team members think in the same direction at the same time, allowing for more organized discussion and collaboration. It’s an approach popularized by Edward de Bono with the “ Six Thinking Hats ” technique, where each “hat” represents a different style of thinking.

In the context of software engineering, parallel thinking can be highly effective for problem solving. For instance, when dealing with a complex issue, the team can use the “White Hat” to focus solely on the data and facts about the problem, then the “Black Hat” to consider potential problems with a proposed solution, and so on. This structured approach can lead to more comprehensive analysis and more effective solutions, and it ensures that everyone’s perspectives are considered.

This is the process of identifying and fixing errors in code . Debugging involves carefully reviewing the code, reproducing and analyzing the error, and then making necessary modifications to rectify the problem. It’s a key part of maintaining and improving software quality.

Testing and Validation

Testing is an essential part of problem solving in software engineering. Engineers use a variety of tests to verify that their code works as expected and to uncover any potential issues. These range from unit tests that check individual components of the code to integration tests that ensure the pieces work well together. Validation, on the other hand, ensures that the solution not only works but also fulfills the intended requirements and objectives.

Explore verified tech roles & skills.

The definitive directory of tech roles, backed by machine learning and skills intelligence.

Explore all roles

Evaluating Problem-Solving Skills

We’ve examined the importance of problem-solving in the work of a software engineer and explored various techniques software engineers employ to approach complex challenges. Now, let’s delve into how hiring teams can identify and evaluate problem-solving skills during the hiring process.

Recognizing Problem-Solving Skills in Candidates

How can you tell if a candidate is a good problem solver? Look for these indicators:

• Previous Experience: A history of dealing with complex, challenging projects is often a good sign. Ask the candidate to discuss a difficult problem they faced in a previous role and how they solved it.
• Problem-Solving Questions: During interviews, pose hypothetical scenarios or present real problems your company has faced. Ask candidates to explain how they would tackle these issues. You’re not just looking for a correct solution but the thought process that led them there.
• Technical Tests: Coding challenges and other technical tests can provide insight into a candidate’s problem-solving abilities. Consider leveraging a platform for assessing these skills in a realistic, job-related context.

Assessing Problem-Solving Skills

Once you’ve identified potential problem solvers, here are a few ways you can assess their skills:

• Solution Effectiveness: Did the candidate solve the problem? How efficient and effective is their solution?
• Approach and Process: Go beyond whether or not they solved the problem and examine how they arrived at their solution. Did they break the problem down into manageable parts? Did they consider different perspectives and possibilities?
• Communication: A good problem solver can explain their thought process clearly. Can the candidate effectively communicate how they arrived at their solution and why they chose it?
• Adaptability: Problem-solving often involves a degree of trial and error. How does the candidate handle roadblocks? Do they adapt their approach based on new information or feedback?

Hiring managers play a crucial role in identifying and fostering problem-solving skills within their teams. By focusing on these abilities during the hiring process, companies can build teams that are more capable, innovative, and resilient.

Key Takeaways

As you can see, problem solving plays a pivotal role in software engineering. Far from being an occasional requirement, it is the lifeblood that drives development forward, catalyzes innovation, and delivers of quality software. 

By leveraging problem-solving techniques, software engineers employ a powerful suite of strategies to overcome complex challenges. But mastering these techniques isn’t simple feat. It requires a learning mindset, regular practice, collaboration, reflective thinking, resilience, and a commitment to staying updated with industry trends. 

For hiring managers and team leads, recognizing these skills and fostering a culture that values and nurtures problem solving is key. It’s this emphasis on problem solving that can differentiate an average team from a high-performing one and an ordinary product from an industry-leading one.

At the end of the day, software engineering is fundamentally about solving problems — problems that matter to businesses, to users, and to the wider society. And it’s the proficient problem solvers who stand at the forefront of this dynamic field, turning challenges into opportunities, and ideas into reality.

This article was written with the help of AI. Can you tell which parts?

Get started with HackerRank

Over 3,000 companies and 40% of developers worldwide use HackerRank to hire tech talent and sharpen their skills.

Recommended topics

• Hire Developers
• Problem Solving

How to Incorporate Candidate Feedback Into Your Hiring Process

Forgot password? New user? Sign up

Existing user? Log in

• Number Theory
• Probability
• Everyday Math
• Classical Mechanics
• Electricity and Magnetism

Computer Science

• Quantitative Finance

Take a guided, problem-solving based approach to learning Computer Science. These compilations provide unique perspectives and applications you won't find anywhere else.

Computer Science Fundamentals

What's inside.

• Tools of Computer Science
• Computational Problem Solving
• Algorithmic Thinking

Algorithm Fundamentals

• Building Blocks
• Array Algorithms
• The Speed of Algorithms
• Stable Matching

Programming with Python

• Introduction
• String Manipulation
• Loops, Functions and Arguments

Community Wiki

Browse through thousands of Computer Science wikis written by our community of experts.

Types and Data Structures

• Abstract Data Types
• Array (ADT)
• Double Ended Queues
• Associative Arrays
• Priority Queues
• Array (Data Structure)
• Disjoint-set Data Structure (Union-Find)
• Dynamic Array
• Linked List
• Unrolled Linked List
• Hash Tables
• Bloom Filter
• Cuckoo Filter
• Merkle Tree
• Recursive Backtracking
• Fenwick Tree
• Binary Search Trees
• Red-Black Tree
• Scapegoat Tree
• Binary Heap
• Binomial Heap
• Fibonacci Heap
• Pairing Heap
• Graph implementation and representation
• Adjacency Matrix
• Spanning Trees
• Social Networks
• Kruskal's Algorithm
• Regular Expressions
• Divide and Conquer
• Greedy Algorithms
• Randomized Algorithms
• Complexity Theory
• Big O Notation
• Master Theorem
• Amortized Analysis
• Complexity Classes
• P versus NP
• Dynamic Programming
• Backpack Problem
• Egg Dropping
• Fast Fibonacci Transform
• Karatsuba Algorithm
• Sorting Algorithms
• Insertion Sort
• Bubble Sort
• Counting Sort
• Median-finding Algorithm
• Binary Search
• Depth-First Search (DFS)
• Breadth-First Search (BFS)
• Shortest Path Algorithms
• Dijkstra's Shortest Path Algorithm
• Bellman-Ford Algorithm
• Floyd-Warshall Algorithm
• Johnson's Algorithm
• Matching (Graph Theory)
• Matching Algorithms (Graph Theory)
• Flow Network
• Max-flow Min-cut Algorithm
• Ford-Fulkerson Algorithm
• Edmonds-Karp Algorithm
• Shunting Yard Algorithm
• Rabin-Karp Algorithm
• Knuth-Morris-Pratt Algorithm
• Basic Shapes, Polygons, Trigonometry
• Convex Hull
• Finite State Machines
• Turing Machines
• Halting Problem
• Kolmogorov Complexity
• Traveling Salesperson Problem
• Pushdown Automata
• Regular Languages
• Context Free Grammars
• Context Free Languages
• Signals and Systems
• Linear Time Invariant Systems
• Predicting System Behavior

Programming Languages

• Subroutines
• List comprehension
• Primality Testing
• Pattern matching
• Logic Gates
• Control Flow Statements
• Object-Oriented Programming
• Classes (OOP)
• Methods (OOP)

Cryptography and Simulations

• Caesar Cipher
• Vigenère Cipher
• RSA Encryption
• Enigma Machine
• Diffie-Hellman
• Knapsack Cryptosystem
• Secure Hash Algorithms
• Entropy (Information Theory)
• Huffman Code
• Error correcting codes
• Symmetric Ciphers
• Inverse Transform Sampling
• Monte-Carlo Simulation
• Genetic Algorithms
• Programming Blackjack
• Machine Learning
• Supervised Learning
• Unsupervised Learning
• Feature Vector
• Naive Bayes Classifier
• K-nearest Neighbors
• Support Vector Machines
• Principal Component Analysis
• Ridge Regression
• k-Means Clustering
• Markov Chains
• Hidden Markov Models
• Gaussian Mixture Model
• Collaborative Filtering
• Artificial Neural Network
• Feedforward Neural Networks
• Backpropagation
• Recurrent Neural Network

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...

Quiz on Problem-Solving

Test your understanding of the key steps in problem-solving, pseudocode, and flowcharts.

Pseudocode is:

Programming language independent

Programming language independent and subjective

None of the above

• Computer Skills Test
• Computer Tech Practice Test�
• Computer Tech Test Guide

Computer Tech Skills Practice Test

• Computer Tech Skills Flash Cards

• Experiences

Competitive Event Resources

The documents, resources, and materials curated herein by the maryland fbla state officer team are not official resources endorsed or created by the national association or maryland fbla.  these resources have been gathered for the express purpose of assisting maryland fbla members in directing their preparation for the competitive events program and should not be relied on as a sole source of information and preparation.  official competitive events preparation materials, educational outcomes, and other resources may be prepared and released by the national association from time to time via the national website ( fbla.org ) and their related communication channels..

How to test for hardware failures in a computer

If you suspect a specific piece of hardware is not working correctly, click the appropriate links below. Otherwise, if you are unsure which hardware may have an issue, we suggest browsing through the whole document for a proper diagnosis. Although hardware failures most certainly may occur in your computer, it is important to check for as many software issues as you can before proceeding. The fact is, most errors are caused by software (such as drivers ) related problems, not by a failing hardware device. See basic troubleshooting for a good starting point.

• Computer HDD (hard disk drive).
• Computer RAM (random-access memory).
• Computer motherboard & CPU (central processing unit).
• Computer PSU (power supply unit).
• Computer CD/DVD disc drives.
• Computer network, Wi-Fi, or Internet.

Computer HDD (hard disk drive)

• How to test a hard drive for failures.

Computer RAM (random-access memory)

• How to test computer memory to determine if it's bad.

Computer motherboard & CPU (central processing unit)

• How to test a computer motherboard and CPU for failures.

Computer PSU (power supply unit)

Although some programs, such as SpeedFan, helps monitor the voltage and power supplied to computer fans, there is no software utility to test the integrity of computer power supplies.

There are methods of testing the connectors on a power supply using a multimeter . However, due to potential damage to the power supply, the motherboard, and components connected to it, this information is not posted on Computer Hope. Due to their relatively low cost and easy installation, we recommend users replace the power supply if it's believed to be failing or bad.

• Why won't my computer turn on?

Computer CD/DVD disc drives

• How to test a computer CD-ROM and DVD drive for failures.

Computer network, Wi-Fi, or Internet

If you are having problems connecting to the Internet on your devices, you may be encountering a problem with your network or Wi-Fi connection. Below are the steps on troubleshooting networking and Wi-Fi related problems.

• Basic network troubleshooting.
• Why is my Wi-Fi not working?
• How to adjust the settings of a home router.
• Where do I find my WEP, WPA, or WPA2 key?

Related information

• Basic computer troubleshooting.
• POST troubleshooting steps.
• See the CD , CPU , DVD , HDD , motherboard , PSU , and RAM definitions for further information and related links.
• Computer hardware help and support.

Ultimate Quiz On Problem Solving And Computers

Do you understand the concept of problem-solving using a computer? To test your knowledge, you can try these MCQs on problem-solving using the computer. Computer-based problem-solving is a process of designing, implementing, and using programming tools. Do you know the difference between pseudocode and an algorithm? What are the other terms associated with these two? Start this quiz, and check out your scores. All the best! You can share the quiz with others also.

An artificial language designed to express actions that control the behavior of a machine.

Natural language

Programming language

Rate this question:

A person who thinks rationally and objectively to get an unbiased solution to a problem.

Problem solver

Critical thinker

Systems analyst

Which of the following is not a model used in problem-solving?

Critical thinking

In the expression count = count + 1, the value of count is

How does the waterfall model differ from the systems development life cycle model.

The stages are long and tedious

Iterations are difficult and must be done at the end

New problems cannot be incorporated into the solution

Users are not involved in its development

In programming, the value of a constant

Remains the same once the variable is given a value

Changes regularly in the program

Does not change during program execution

Is only affected when new values are given to it

One phase of the systems development model is

Testing of users

Training of users

Production of documentations

Evaluation of the new system

For a new system to be implemented, it must be backed by: i. the users ii. the systems development team iii. the managers of the company

I and ii only are needed to support the new system

I and iv only are needed to support the new system

I and iii only are needed to support the new system

I, ii, and iii must support the new system

This is a crucial attribute that is required of all problem solvers.

Waiting skill

Listening skill

Which is true about Algorithms?

Algorithms can easily be converted into program codes.

Algorithms are written in formal notation.

Algorithms provide a sequence of steps that will solve a problem.

Algorithms are only used for math and computer-related problems.

How pseudocode differs from an algorithm?

Pseudocodes are precise, while algorithms are not.

Pseudocode must solve the problem, whereas the algorithm does not have to.

Pseudocode is a precursor to computer program codes.

An algorithm is written by the problem solver, while pseudocode is written by the code designer.

An area in memory where changeable values are stored is called

An assignment statement is recognized by.

An equal sign

A statement of value

A plus sign

An operation

When output must be sent to a file, we use the keyword.

If an area is fully understood by the users and developers, then which model would be suitable.

Problem-solving

Programming

Consider the following codes: Begin Line 1         sum = 0 Line 2         input num1, num2, num3 Line 3         sum = num1+num2 +num3 Line 4         Print sum End  If num1 = 2, num2 = 3, num3 = 4, and the codes were executed as is, what would be the result:

Program failure

Consider the codes, where each variable contains its name as the value, such that A is A: BeginLine 1         c = a Line 2         a = b Line 3         b = c Line 3         Print a, b EndWhat is the printed upon termination

Consider the following codes:beginline 1         sum = 0 line 2         input num1, num2, num3 line 3         sum = num1+num2 +num3 line 4         print “your total is”, sum end if num1 = 8, num2 = 7, num3 = 9, and the codes were executed as is, what would be the result:.

Your total is 24

Your total is sum

"Your total is", 24

"Your total is 24"

In pseudocode the statements used must

Solve the problem

Be properly structured and indented to illustrate the flow of logic and control

Literally correct

Have good English meanings and be recognizable English words

One conversion method that can be used by the system development team while the users in the office are still in training is

Phased conversion

Direct conversion

Pilot conversion

Systematic conversion

At what stage of the SDLC is the complete system checked for compatibility?

The design phase

Evaluation phase

Implementation phase

Maintenance phase

Which is true about systems?

A system boundary separates the system from its environment

The scope of the system extends beyond its boundary

System consists of interrelated components working together to achieve varying goals

The good system will solve all the organization's problems

Which of the following provides an accurate description of a problem?

A difficulty that cannot be solved

A difficulty that prevents the accomplishment of some objective

A difficulty that arises from some existing dilemma

A challenge that hinders progress that may have no solution

Which is most accurate about problem statements?

The problem statement helps the users to communicate the problem

The problem statement is just a summary of the issues faced

The problem statement is the backbone of the feasibility and the problem solution

It includes the symptoms and constraints and so often misleads users

The word INPUT is used to

Set aside some memory to run the program

Set aside some memory area to store the value of the constant inputted

Set aside some memory area to store the value of the variable entered

Used to give the variable its value

Related Topics

• Multiplication
• Intelligence

Recent Quizzes

Featured Quizzes

Popular Topics

• Algebra Quizzes
• Calculus Quizzes
• Data Handling Quizzes
• Decimal Quizzes
• Discrete Mathematics Quizzes
• Equation Quizzes
• Function Quizzes
• Geometry Quizzes
• Graph Quizzes
• Measurement Quizzes
• Number Quizzes
• Percentage Quizzes
• Place Value Quizzes
• Probability Quizzes
• Ratio Quizzes
• Shape Quizzes
• Statistics Quizzes
• Trigonometry Quizzes

Related Quizzes

Wait! Here's an interesting quiz for you.

• Published: 10 November 2023

Estimation of individuals’ collaborative problem solving ability in computer-based assessment

• Meijuan Li   nAff1 ,
• Hongyun Liu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3472-9102 2 , 3 ,
• Mengfei Cai 4 &
• Jianlin Yuan 5  

Education and Information Technologies ( 2023 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

In the human-to-human Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS) test, students’ problem-solving process reflects the interdependency among partners. The high interdependency in CPS makes it very sensitive to group composition. For example, the group outcome might be driven by a highly competent group member, so it does not reflect all the individual performances, especially for a low-ability member. As a result, how to effectively assess individuals’ performances has become a challenging issue in educational measurement. This research aims to construct the measurement model to estimate an individual’s collaborative problem-solving ability and correct the impact of partners’ abilities. First, 175 eighth graders’ dyads were divided into six cooperative groups with different levels of problem-solving (PS) ability combinations (i.e., high-high, high-medium, high-low, medium-medium, medium–low, and low-low). Then, they participated in the test of three CPS tasks, and the log data of the dyads were recorded. We applied Multidimensional Item Response Theory (MIRT) measurement models to estimate an individual’s CPS ability and proposed a mean correction method to correct the impact of group composition on individual ability. Results show that (1) the multidimensional IRT model fits the data better than the multidimensional IRT model with the testlet effect; (2) the mean correction method significantly reduced the impact of group composition on obtained individual ability. This study not only successfully increased the validity of individuals’ CPS ability measurement but also provided useful guidelines in educational settings to enhance individuals’ CPS ability and promote an individualized learning environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution .

Access options

Buy single article.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Price excludes VAT (USA) Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Rent this article via DeepDyve.

Data availability

The datasets analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Adams, R. J., Wilson, M., & Wang, W. C. (1997). The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21 (1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621697211001

Article   Google Scholar  

Adams, R. J., Vista, A., Scoular, C., Awwal, N., Griffin, P., & Care, E. (2015). Automatic coding procedures for collaborative problem solving. In E. Care, P. Griffin, & M. Wilson (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approaches (pp. 115–132). Springer.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19 (6), 716–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2007.09.001

Article   MathSciNet   MATH   Google Scholar  

Andrews, T. J., & Forsyth, C. M. (2020). Exploring social and cognitive dimensions of collaborative problem solving in an open online simulation-based task. Computers in Human Behavior, 104 , 105759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.10.025

Andrews, J. J., Kerr, D., Mislevy, R. J., von Davier, A., Hao, J., & Liu, L. (2017). Modeling collaborative interaction patterns in a simulation-based task. Journal of Educational Measurement, 54 (1), 54–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12132

Baker, F. B., & Kim, S. (2004). Item response theory, parameter estimation techniques (2nd ed.). Marcel Dekker, Inc.

Book   MATH   Google Scholar  

Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring a student’s ability. In F. M. Lord & M. R. Novick (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 397–424). Addison-Wesley.

Google Scholar  

Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Tannenbaum, S. I., Salas, E., & Volpe, C. E. (1995). Defining competencies and establishing team training requirements. In R. A. Guzzo & E. Salas (Eds.), Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations (pp. 333–380). Wiley.

Care, E., Griffin, P., Scoular, C., Awwal, N., & Zoanetti, N. (2015). Collaborative problem solving tasks. In P. Griffin & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach (pp. 85–104). Springer.

Care, E., Scoular, C., & Griffin, P. (2016). Assessment of collaborative problem solving in education environments. Applied Measurement in Education, 29 (4), 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2016.1209204

Christensen, P. R. (2012). mirt: a multidimensional item response theory package for the R envionment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48 , 1–29. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06

Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement , 20 (1), 37–46.  https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104

Dechurch, L. A., & Mesmer-Magnus, J. R. (2010). The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95 (1), 32–53. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017328

Demars, C. E. (2006). Application of the bi-factor multidimensional item response theory model to testlet-based tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43 (2), 145–168. https://doi.org/10.2307/20461818

Demars, C. E., & Jacovidis, J. (2016). Multilevel Item Response Theory (IRT): When is local independence violated. Paper poster presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Washington, DC.

Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists . Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gao, Q., Zhang, S., Cai, Z., Liu, K., Hui, N., & Tong, M. (2022). Understanding student teachers’ collaborative problem solving competency: insights from process data and multidimensional item response theory. Thinking Sills and Creativity, 45 , 101097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101097

Graesser, A., Kuo, B. C., & Liao, C. H. (2017). Complex problem solving in assessments of collaborative problem solving. Journal of Intelligence, 5 (10), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5020010

Graesser, A. C., Fiore, S. M., Greiff, S., Andrews, T. J., Foltz, P. W., & Hesse, F. W. (2018). Advancing the science of collaborative problem solving. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19 (2), 59–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618808244

Griffin, P., Care, E., & McGaw, B. (2012). The changing role of education and schools. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 1–16). Springer.

Griffin, P., Care, E., & Harding, S. (2015). Task characteristics and calibration. In P. Griffin & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach (pp. 133–178). Springer.

Herborn, K., Stadler, M., Mustafić, M., & Greiff, S. (2020). The assessment of collaborative problem solving in PISA 2015: Can computer agents replace humans? Computers in Human Behavior, 104 , 105624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.035

Hesse, F., Care, E., Buder, J., Sassenberg, K., & Griffin, P. (2015). A framework for teachable collaborative problem solving skills. In P. Griffin & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach (pp. 37–56). Springer.

Hao, J., Liu, L., Davier, A. A. V., & Kyllonen, P. C. (2017). Initial steps towards a standardized assessment for collaborative problem solving (cps): Practical challenges and strategies. In A. A. von Davier, M. Zhu, & P. C. Kyllonen (Eds.), Innovative assessment of collaboration. (pp. 135–156). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

Kyllonen, P. C., Zhu, M., & von Davier, A. A. (2017). Introduction: Innovative assessment of collaboration. In A. A. von Davier, M. Zhu, & P. C. Kyllonen (Eds.), Innovative assessment of collaboration (pp. 1–18). Springer International Publishing.

Laughlin, P. R., & Branch, L. G. (1972). Individual versus tetadic performance on a complementary task as a function of initial ability level. Organizational Bahavior and Human Performance, 8 (2), 201–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(72)90046-3

Li, M., Liu, H., & Yuan, J. (2022). The application of computational psychometrics in the assessment of key competencies: A case of collaborative problem solving. Educational Research, 43 (3), 127–137.

Liu, L., Hao, J., von Davier, A. A., Kyllonen, P., & Zapata-Rivera, J. D. (2015). A tough nut to crack: measuring collaborative problem solving. In Y. Rosen, S. Ferrara, & M. Mosharraf (Eds.), Handbook of research on technology tools for real-world skill development (pp. 344–359). IGI Global.

Marais, I., & Andrich, D. (2008). Formalizing dimension and response violations of local independence in the unidimensional Rasch model. Journal of Applied Measurement, 9 (3), 200–215. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-0252/4/1/010

Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. The Academy of Management Review, 26 (3), 356. https://doi.org/10.2307/259182

Moreland, R. L., & Levine, J. M. (1992). The compositioin of small groups. Advances in Group Process, 9 , 237–280.

Muraki, E. (1992). A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16 (2), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1992.tb01436.x

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1998–2017). Mplus user’s guide, eighth edition . Muthén & Muthén.

OECD. (2004). Problem solving for tomorrow’s world: First measures of cross-curricular competencies from PISA 2003 . OECD Publishing.

OECD. (2017a). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic, financial literacy and collaborative problem solving (revised). OECD Publishing.

Book   Google Scholar  

OECD. (2017b). PISA 2015 technical report . OECD Publishing.

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2019). Framework for 21st century learning definitions . Retrieved from http://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21/frameworks-resources . Accessed 10-08-2021

Ramalingam, D., & Adams, R. J. (2015). How can the use of data from computer-delivered assessments improve the measurement of twenty-first century skills? In E. Care, P. Griffin, & M. Wilson (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Research and applications (pp. 225–238). Springer.

Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. W. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Application and data analysis methods (second edtion) . England.

Reckase, M. D. (2009). Multidimensional item response theory . Springer.

Rosen, Y., & Rimor, R. (2009). Using collaborative database to enhance students’ knowledge construction. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 5 , 187–195.

Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70 (1), 41–55. https://doi.org/10.2307/2335942

Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6 (2), 461–464. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344136

Stewart, A. E., Amon, M. J., Duran, N. D., & D’Mello, S. K. (2020). Beyond team makeup: Diversity in teams predicts valued outcomes in computer-mediated collaborations. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , 1–13.

Sun, C., Shute, V. J., Stewart, A., Yonehiro, J., Duran, N., & D’Mello, S. (2020). Towards a generalized competency model of collaborative problem solving. Computers & Education, 143 , 103672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103672

Swiecki, Z., Ruis, A. R., Farrell, C., & Shaffer, D. W. (2020). Assessing individual contributions to collaborative problem solving: a network analysis approch. Computers in Human Behavior, 104 , 105876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.009

Tannenbaum, S. I., Beard, R. L., & Salas, E. (1992). Team building and its influence on teameffectiveness: An examination of conceptual and empirical developments. Advances inPsychology, 82 , 117–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62601-1

Vista, A., Awwal, N., & Care, E. (2016). Sequential actions as markers of behavioural and cognitive processes: Extracting empirical pathways from data streams of complex tasks. Computers & Education, 92–93 , 15–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.009

Vista, A., Care, E., & Awwal, N. (2017). Visualising and examining sequential actions as behavioural paths that can be interpreted as markers of complex behaviours. Computers in Human Behavior, 76 , 656–671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.027

Von Davier, A. A. (2017). Computational psychometrics in support of collaborative educational assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 54 (1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12129

Von Davier, A. A., & Halpin, P. F. (2013). Collaborative Problem Solving and the Assessment of Cognitive Skills: Psychometric Considerations. ETS RR-13–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.2013.tb02348.x

Wang, W. C., & Wilson, M. (2005). Exploring local item dependence using a random-effects facet model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29 (4), 296–318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621605276281

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Webb, N. M. (1995). Group collaboration in assessment: Multiple objectives, processes and outcomes. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17 (2), 239–261. https://doi.org/10.2307/1164563

Webb, N., Nemer, K. M., Chizhik, A., & Sugrue, B. (1998). Equity issues in collaborative group assessment: Group composition and performance. American Educational Research Journal, 35 (4), 607–651. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312035004607

Wilczenski, F. L., Bontrager, T., Ventrone, P., & Correia, M. (2001). Observing collaborative problem-solving processes and outcomes. Psychology in the Schools, 38 , 269–281. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.1017

Wilson, M., Gochyyev, P., & Scalise, K. (2017). Modeling data from collaborative assessments: Learning in digital interactive social networks. Journal of Educational Measurement, 54 (1), 85–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12134

Wise, S. L. (2019). An information-based approach to identifying rapid-guessing thresholds. Applied Measurement in Education, 32 (4), 325–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2019.1660350

Yen, W. M. (1984). Effects of local item dependence on the fit and equating performance of the three-parameter logistic model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 8 (2), 125–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168400800201

Yen, W. M. (1993). Scaling performance assessments: Strategies for managing local item dependence. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30 (3), 187–213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1993.tb00423.x

Yuan, J. L., Xiao, Y., & Liu, H. Y. (2019). Assessment of collaborative problem solving based on process stream data: A new paradigm for extracting indicators and modeling dyad data. Frontiers in Psychology, 10 , 369. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00369

Yuan, J. L. (2018). A study of measuring collaborative problem solving based on behavioral process performance (doctoral dissertation). Beijing Normal University, Beijing.

Zhang, S., Gao, Q., Sun, M., Cai, Z., Li, H., Tang, Y., et al. (2022). Understanding student teachers’ collaborative problem solving: insights from an epistemic network analysi (ENA). Computers & Education, 183 , 104485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104485

Zhang, Z., Wilson, M., Alom, M., Awwal, N., & Griffin, P. (2018, April). Adopting a process perspective on collaborative problem solving . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education , NewYork, NY.

Zhu, M., Andrews-Todd, J., & Zhang, M. (2020). Application of network analysis in understanding collaborative problem solving processes and skills. In H. Jiao & R. W. Lissitz (Eds.), Innovative Psychometric Modeling and Methods. Information Age Publisher. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344887044_Application_of_Network_Analysis_in_Understanding_Collaborative_Problem_Solving_Processes_and_Skills/link/5f96d49492851c14bce7a903/download . Accessed 10-08-2021

Zoanetti, N. (2010). Interactive computer based assessment tasks: how problem-solving process data can inform instruction. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26 (5), 585–606. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1053

Download references

The key project for the 14th five-year plan of Beijing education sciences in 2022 (CDAA22033)

Author information

Present address: Pedagogic Research Institute for Basic Education, Beijing Academy of Educational Sciences, Beijing, China

Authors and Affiliations

Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

Hongyun Liu

Beijing Key Laboratory of Applied Experimental Psychology, National Demonstration Center for Experimental Psychology Education (Beijing Normal University), Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

Psychology, Division of Social Science & Communication, Manhattanville College, Purchase, NY, USA

Mengfei Cai

Educational Science Research Institute, Hunan University, Changsha, China

Jianlin Yuan

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hongyun Liu .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors have no competing interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Three human-to-human interaction tasks (Clown, Plant Growth, and Olive Oil) were employed in this study. The following is a detailed description of the coding scheme for the log data, using the "olive oil" task as an example.

1.1 The Olive Oil task

The “Olive Oil” task is a well-defined algorithm problem, which can be completed by two students’ collaboration. As Appendix Fig.  4 shows, the left side is student A’s interface and the right one is student B’s. Two students have jars with different volumes, student A’s is 3L and student B’s is 5L. The task goal is to fill up student B’s jar with 4L olive oil. The transfer pipe can be used to transfer olive oil from student A to B, and the unused olive oil can be put in the bucket. Students A and B need to type texts in the chat windows to communicate and collaborate on this task. The ideal path includes eight steps: 1, Student A filled up 3L olive oil; 2, Student A transfered the 3L olive oil to student B; 3, Student A filled up 3L olive oil again; 4, Student A transfered 2L olive oil to student B and kept 1L olive oil; 5, Student B poured all the olive oil in the 5L jar; 6, Student A transfered the left 1L olive oil to student B; 7, Student A filled up with 3L olive oil again; 8, Student transfered the 3L olive oil to student B so the later has 4L in total. Appendix Fig.  4 shows the instruction and the problem space on two screen tabs in the Olive Oil task.

The screenshot of student A (at the top) and student B (at the bottom) in the Olive Oil Task

1.2 Log data

Appendix Table 13 shows the original log data of a group of students completing the “Olive Oil” task recorded by a computer. It includes five variables: ID is the sequence number of a group’s behaviors and conversations while completing the task; GroupID is the group number; log_type shows the type of current event of the student; log_content shows the content of current event of the student; role is the student’s mission role. In addition, Table 14 has a detailed introduction of the data types in log_content.

The operation behaviors and conversations in the CPS process need to be coded by using the following methods:

1.3.1 Behavior coding

There are two steps in behavior coding. The first one is to delete the meaningless behaviors and keep the meaningful ones. Meaningful behaviors can reflect the progress of CPS mission. For example, students’ filling oil, transferring oil, and pouring oil conducted in the “Olive Oil” task. Meaningless behaviors include the ones that don’t provide any task progress information, such as clicking and dragging the mouse, moving the jar, and turning on and off the transfer pipe in the task.

The second step is to code the meaningful behavior data to describe students’ meaningful behaviors in the CPS process. In order to achieve the goal, the two students in the same group need to collaborate to clearly understand the problem-solving strategy and design a logical problem-solving process. To represent the students’ behavioral status in the CPS process, this type of coding needs to reflect the student’s operation, as well as the cumulated status of all the steps. For example, using the expression formula “A/B 3L/5L_fill/to/trans: 3L = X;5L = Y” to code students’ operation behaviors and the oil volumes in the jars. “A/B” stands for students’ roles; “3L/5L” means the jar volume in operation. Student A uses the 3L jar and student B uses the 5L jar; “fill” means adding oil, “to” means pouring oil, and “trans” means passing oil; “3L = X” is the oil volume in student A’s jar at this moment, and “5L = Y” is the oil volume in student B’s jar at this moment. For example, “A 3L_fill:3L = 3,5L = 0” represents student A added 3L oil at this moment, so his/her jar has 3L oil, while student B’s jar has 0L oil.

1.3.2 Language coding

Language coding has two steps. First, Language coding indicators are determined based on students’ performance, including four dimensions: sharing ideas, negotiating ideas, regulating problem-solving, and maintaining communication (Liu et al., 2015 ; Hao et al., 2017 ). 33 coding indicators found by Hao ( 2017 ) were expanded to 38 to distinguish students’ language characteristics in CPS process（Table 14 ). Among the added five indicators, four of them are about sharing ideas, which distinguish the content of sharing ideas (resources, mission progress status), proactivity, and the roles of questioning and responding. The other added indicator is about maintaining communication—students communicating the negative thoughts of giving up. The second step is to use manual coding to achieve language coding. It started with using a coding manual to train all the coding staff. Then 10 sets of data were chosen from each mission, and language contents from different time frames were double-coded. When two codes are inconsistent, it was discussed and finalized. Lastly, 20% of data were chosen and double-coded so the consistency coefficient was calculated. For the three missions, if Kappa coefficient reaches 0.98 on the CPS skills level and reaches 0.84 ~ 0.88 at the student performance (subcategories) level, then they have reached a sufficient consistency coefficient (Cohen, 1960 ). Once the coding consistency coefficient reaches 0.80, the rest of the data is single-coded .

1.4 Form structured log data

Through behavior coding and language coding, CPS structured log data is established. Appendix Table 15 presents the data example of structured log data in this task. “Eventtype” is the type of event, in which “action” stands for behaviors, and “chat” stands for language. “Event” represents the structured log data. For example, the fourth event in the group is “C11”, which means student A’s language type at this moment is “to share information related to mission resources with teammate”. The sixth event is “A 3L_fill:3L = 3;5L = 0”, which means at this moment student A is using the 3L jar to fill oil, then he/she has 3L oil, while student B has 0L oil.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Li, M., Liu, H., Cai, M. et al. Estimation of individuals’ collaborative problem solving ability in computer-based assessment. Educ Inf Technol (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12271-w

Download citation

Received : 12 February 2023

Accepted : 09 October 2023

Published : 10 November 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12271-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Human-to-human Collaborative Problem Solving
• Individuals’ Collaborative problem-solving ability
• a mean correction method
• Computer-based Assessment

Advertisement

• Find a journal
• Publish with us

• Who is Florida FBLA?
• Competitive Event Guidelines
• Competitive Event Rating Sheets
• FBLA State Officers
• March of Dimes
• Scaled Quota for FBLA Competitive Events
• Scholarship
• Standards of Mailability

COMPUTER PROBLEM SOLVING

 Computer Problem Solving provides members with the opportunity to demonstrate knowledge about operating systems, networks and hardware. This competitive event consists of an objective test. This event aims to inspire members to learn about computer problem solving.

Event Overview

Division: High School Event Type: Individual Event Category: Objective Test, 100-multiple choice questions (breakdown of question by competencies below) Objective Test Time: 50 minutes NACE Connections : Career & Self-Development

Equipment Competitor Must Provide: Pencil Objective Test Competencies:

·         Operating systems ·         Networks ·         Personal computer components ·         Security ·         Safety and environmental issues ·         Laptop and portable devices ·         Printers and scanners

Check with your District leadership for District-specific competition information.

Eligibility

·         FBLA membership dues are paid by 11:59 pm Eastern Time on December 1 of the current program year. ·         Members may compete in an event at the State Leadership Conference (SLC) more than once if they have not previously placed in the top 10 of that event at the National Leadership Conference (NLC). If a member places in the top 10 of an event at the NLC, they are no longer eligible to compete in that event. ·         Members must be registered for the SLC and pay the state conference registration fee in order to participate in competitive events. ·         Members must stay in an official FBLA hotel to be eligible to compete. ·         Each district may be represented by participant(s) based on the Florida FBLA scaled quota system found on the Florida FBLA website. ·         Each member can only compete in one individual/team event and one chapter event (American Enterprise Project, Community Service Project, Local Chapter Annual Business Report, Partnership with Business Project). ·         If competitors are late for an objective test, they may be either disqualified or permitted to begin late with no extension of the time as scheduled. ·         Participants must adhere to the Florida FBLA dress code established by the Florida Board of Directors or they will not be permitted to participate in the competitive event.

Recognition

·         The number of competitors will determine the number of winners. The maximum number of winners for each competitive event is 5.

Event Administration

·         This event is an objective test administered at the SLC. ·         No reference or study materials may be brought to the testing site. ·         No calculators may be brought into the testing site.

Tie Breaker

·         Ties are broken by comparing the correct number of answers to the last 10 questions on the test. If a tie remains, answers to the last 20 questions on the test will be reviewed to determine the winner. If a tie remains, the competitor who completed the test in a shorter amount of time will place higher.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

·         FBLA meets the criteria specified in the Americans with Disabilities Act for all competitors with accommodations submitted through the conference registration system by the registration deadline.

Penalty Points

·         Competitors may be disqualified if they violate the Competitive Event Guidelines or the Honor Code.

Electronic Devices

·         All electronic devices such as cell phones and watches of any type are not to be brought to the testing site.

Be sure to see the National guidelines at https://www.fbla.org/divisions/fbla/fbla-competitive-events/