Opportunities for learning analytics supporting learning and teaching in teacher education

Authors

  • Kaire Kollom
  • Kairit Tammets

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2017.5.2.10

Keywords:

learning analytics, self-directed learner, learning environment, teacher training, academic staff

Abstract

Info- ja kommunikatsioonitehnoloogia rakendamine ning õpihaldussüsteemide ja õpikeskkondade kasutamine õppeprotsessis on muutnud õpetajaks õppijate õpikogemusi ning õpetajahariduse õppejõudude õpetamisviise. Sellega kaasnevad erinevad digitaalsed andmed, mis annavad õppijale, õpetajale ning õppekava eestvedajale tagasisidet õppimise ja õpetamise tõhustamiseks. Haridusvaldkonnas aina enam rakendust leidev õpianalüütika võimaldab suurendada õppijate teadlikkust ja tõhusust õppeprotsessis, individualiseerida õppeprotsessi ning saada pidevat ja jooksvat tagasisidet õppimise edenemise kohta. Artikli eesmärk on analüüsida õpetajahariduse üliõpilaste ja õppejõudude ootusi õpianalüütika võimaluste suhtes, et toetada õpikeskkonnas õppimist ja õpetamist. Uurimuse teoreetilise raamistiku loob ennastjuhtiva õppija kontseptsioon. Uurimistulemused baseeruvad disainipõhisel uurimusel, kus osalusdisaini sessioonide käigus selgitati välja õpikeskkonna kasutajate (üliõpilaste, õppejõudude, õppekavade juhtide) ootused õpikeskkonna õpianalüütikarakenduste suhtes.

PDF Summary

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Arnold, K. E., & Pistilli, M. D. (2012). Course signals at Purdue: Using learning analytics to increase student success. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge. New York: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2330601.2330666

Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1

Beyer, H., & Holtzblatt, K. (1998). Contextual design: Defining customer-centered systems. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.

Bichsel, J. (2012). Analytics in higher education: Benefits, barriers, progress, and recommendations (research report). Louisville: EDUCAUSE Centre for Applied Research. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERS1207/ers1207.pdf.

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington: National Academy Press.

Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245–281. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543065003245

Corrin, L., & de Barba, P. (2014). Exploring students’ interpretation of feedback delivered through learning analytics dashboards. In B. Hegarty, J. McDonald, & S.-K. Loke (Eds.), Rhetoric and reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology. Proceedings, ASCILITE, Dunedin 2014 (pp. 629–633).

Dunlosky, J., & Thiede, K. W. (1998). What makes people study more? An evaluation of factors that affect self-paced study. Acta Psychologica, 98(1), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(97)00051-6

Durall, E., & Gros, B. (2014). Learning analytics as a metacognitive tool. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Supported Education CSEDU (pp. 380–384).

Hackos, J. T., & Redish, J. C. (1998). User and task analysis for interface design. New York: Wiley.

Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296434

Knight, D. B., Brozina, C., Stauffer, E. M., Frisina, C., & Abel, T. (2015). Developing a learning analytics dashboard for undergraduate engineering using participatory design. Proceedings of the 122nd Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.18260/p.23824

Krippendorff, K. (2006). Semantic turn: New foundations for design. Boca Raton, London: CRC Taylor & Francis.

Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121

Kujula, S., & Mäntylä, M. (2000). How effective are user studies? In S. McDonald, Y. Waern, & G. Cockton (Eds.), People and computers XIV (pp. 61–71). Springer- Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0515-2_5

Laanpere, M., Pata, K., Normak, P., & Põldoja, H. (2014). Pedagogy-driven design of digital learning ecosystems. Computer Science and Information Systems, 11(1), 419−–442. https://doi.org/10.2298/CSIS121204015L

Long, P., & Siemens, G. (2011). Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. EDUCAUSE Review, 46(5), 31–40.

Loyens, S. M. M., Magda, J., & Rikers, R. M. J. P. (2008). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning and its relationships with self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 411–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9082-7

Macfadyen, L. P., & Dawson, S. (2010). Mining LMS data to develop an "early warning system" for educators: A proof of concept. Computers & Education, 54(2), 588–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.008

Macfadyen, L. P., Dawson, S., Pardo, A., & Gaš ević , D. (2014). Embracing big data in complex educational systems: The learning analytics imperative and the policy challenge. Research and Practice in Assessment, 9(2), 17–28.

Park, Y., & Jo, I.-H. (2015). Development of the learning analytics dashboard to support students’ learning performance. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 21(1), 110–133. https://doi.org/10.3217/jucs-021-01-0110

Pata, K., Tammets, K., Tomberg, V., Al Smadi, M., & Laanpere, M. (2016). Three curriculum maturing cycles in academic curriculum management systems. In L. Uden & D. Liberona (Eds.), Learning technology for education in Cloud: The changing face of education (pp. 1–12). Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42147-6_24

Põldoja, H., Duval, E., & Leinonen, T. (2016a). Design and evaluation of an online tool for open learning with blogs. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(2), 64–−81. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2450

Põldoja, H., Jürgens, P., & Laanpere, M. (2016b). Design patterns for badge systems in higher education. In D. K. W. Chiu, I. Marenzi, U. Nanni, M. Spaniol, & M. Temperini (Eds.), Advances in web-based learning – ICWL 2016 (pp. 40–−49). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47440-3_5

Roll, I., Wiese, E. S., Long, Y., Aleven, V., & Koedinger, K. R. (2014). Tutoring selfand co-regulation with intelligent tutoring systems to help students acquire better learning skills. In R. Sottilare, A. Graesser, X. Hu, & B. Goldberg (Eds.), Design recommendations for adaptive intelligent tutoring systems: Volume 2. Adaptive Instructional Strategies (pp. 169–182). Orlando: U.S. Army Research Laboratory.

Schuler, D., & Namioka, A. (Eds.) (1993). Participatory design: Principles and the practices. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Sclater, N., Peasgood, A., & Mullan, J. (2016). Learning analytics in higher education. A review of UK and international practice. Retrieved from https://www.jisc.ac.uk/sites/default/files/learning-analytics-in-he-v3.pdf.

Tammets, K., & Laanpere, M. (2015). Õpianalüütika kontseptuaalne raamistik ja selle rakendatavus Eesti kontekstis. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 3(2), 216–−246. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2015.3.2.08

Verbert, K., Duval, E., Klerkx, J., Govaerts, S., & Santos, J. L. (2013). Learning analytics dashboard applications. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1500–1509. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479363

Väljataga, T., Tammets, K., & Põldoja, H. (2011). Competence development of preservice teachers with the support of LeContract. In I. Aedo, N.-S. Chen, D. G. Sampson, J. M. Spector, & Kinshuk (Eds.), 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 611–612). Athens: IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2011.186

Wolf, P. (2007). A model for facilitating curriculum development in higher education: A faculty-driven, data-informed, and educational developer–supported approach. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 112, 15–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.294

Downloads

Published

2017-10-28

How to Cite

Kollom, K., & Tammets, K. (2017). Opportunities for learning analytics supporting learning and teaching in teacher education. Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri. Estonian Journal of Education, 5(2), 229–256. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2017.5.2.10

Issue

Vol. 5 No. 2 (2017)

Section

Articles

License

The authors who publish in Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri. Estonian Journal of Education agree to the following terms:

  1. This journal provides immediate open access to its content. All the articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License.
  2. Authors grant the journal right of (1) first publication and distribution of the article, (2) making it available to public, (3) public presentation.
  3. Authors have the right to enter into separate contractual arrangements for posting the article to an institutional repository or publish it in a book with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  4. Authors are permitted to post citations from their work online (e.g. on their website) with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal (see Open Access).