Student teams differed markedly in their application of computer engineering and product design practices and in their share of off-task activity¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · qualitativer?·q1
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: baselines and conditions change
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q1 i? The Button Presser team applied computer engineering and product design practices significantly less than the other two teams. → Sini Davies 2024
q1 i? Off-task 3-min segments varied across teams: 22.1% (N = 113) for Button Presser versus 6.6% (N = 122) for Sunny and 12.2% (N = 115) for SleepSound. → Sini Davies 2024 (2)
Evidence¶
Sini Davies 2024¶
Sini Davies, Pirita Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, Kai Hakkarainen. (2024). Knowledge creation through maker practices and the role of teacher and peer support in collaborative invention projects. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-024-09427-2
q1 · i? · qualitative · r?
Comparison across the three teams' coded process rugs in the Findings section: the Button Presser team "applied these prac- tices significantly less than the other two" with respect to computer engineering and product design practices.
"The teams displayed notable variation in the application of computer engineering and product design practices. Figure 1 shows that the Button Presser team applied these prac- tices significantly less than the other two."
Sini Davies 2024 (2)¶
Sini Davies, Pirita Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, Kai Hakkarainen. (2024). Knowledge creation through maker practices and the role of teacher and peer support in collaborative invention projects. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-024-09427-2
q1 · i? · qualitative · r?
Coded percentages of off-task 3-min segments from the process rugs. The Button Presser team had "off-task activity in 22.1% (N = 113)" of its segments, versus 6.6% (N = 122) and 12.2% (N = 115) for the other teams.
"The Button Presser team had off-task activity in 22.1% (N = 113) of the 3-min segments, while the Sunny team spent 6.6% (N = 122) and the SleepSound team 12.2% (N = 115) of their respective projects engaged in off-task activities."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The SleepSound team applied science, computer engineering, and product design practices in more segments and at higher simultaneous intensity than the other two teams — related
- Off-task activity appeared more common in the larger six-to-seven-member teams than in the compact teams, though not in every larger team — related
- A shared epistemic object let a team with substantial off-task time (UrPo) still complete a successful co-invention — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
claim-team-variation-off-task |
title |
Student teams differed markedly in their application of computer engineering and product design practices and in their share of off-task activity |
description |
Student teams differed markedly in their application of computer engineering and product design practices and in their share of off-task activity |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
recheck_by |
2029 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — sini-davies-2024, sini-davies-2024-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.