Algorithmic group formation and group work evaluation in a learning analytics-enhanced environment: implementation study in a Japanese junior high school
Open accessAbstract
In-class group work activities are found to promote the interpersonal skills of learners. To support the teachers in facilitating such activities, we designed a learning analytics-enhanced technology framework, Group Learning Orchestration Based on Evidence (GLOBE) using data-driven approaches. In this study, we implemented the algorithmic group formation and group work evaluation systems in a Japanese junior high school context. Data from a series of 12 collaborative learning activities were used to validate the difference in the measured heterogeneity of the formed homogeneous and heterogeneous groups compared to random grouping. Further, the peer rating and self-perception of the group work were compared for comparative reading and idea exchange tasks. We found algorithmically formed groups, considering the learner model data, either heterogeneously or homogeneously performed better than random grouping. Specifically, students in groups created by the homogeneous algorithm received higher peer ratings and more positive self-perception of group work in the idea exchange group tasks. We did not find significant differences in the comparative reading tasks. Along with the empirical findings, this work presents a paradigm of continuous data-driven group learning support by incorporating the peer and teacher evaluation scores as an input to the subsequent algorithmic grouping.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is a gap in research in how to successfully group students.
“However, there is a gap in research in how to successfully group students.”
From Intentional Grouping: Impacts on Cognitive and Social Presence in a Hybrid Classroom (2025) · cites this paper as Liang et al., 2022
Cites
Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes
VYGOTSKY, L. S. (1980) · doi:10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4 · Cited by 3,123 · cited 3× · see citing works
“…knowledge externalization and elicitation of task-related knowledge happen (Fischer et al., 2002), so that individuals can extend their knowledge by the distribution of knowledge resources within the group work according to Vygotsky ’ s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) theory (Vygotsky, 1980).”
The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback
Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354 · Cited by 2,428 · see citing works
Van Leeuwen, A. (2015) · Journal of Learning Analytics · doi:10.18608/jla.2015.22.11 · Cited by 84 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Intentional Grouping: Impacts on Cognitive and Social Presence in a Hybrid Classroom
Scheidler, B., Layne, K., Gillard, M., & Doucet, B. M. (2025) · Journal of Occupational Therapy Education · doi:10.26681/jote.2025.090210
- Authors
- Liang, C., Majumdar, R., Nakamizo, Y., Flanagan, B., & Ogata, H.
- Affiliations
- Kyoto University (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Liang, Changhao
- Venue
- Interactive Learning Environments
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2022-09-19
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1476-1499
- ISSN
- 1049-4820 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-5191
- OpenAlex
- W4296345904
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 1.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Interactive Learning Environments (publishedVersion)
- Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion)
- Kyoto University Research Information Repository (Kyoto University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- JSPS KAKENHI (16H06304)
- NEDO (JPNP20006, JPNP18013)
- Japan Science and Technology Agency (JPMJSP2110)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- group work evaluation, cooperative learning, learning analytics, student modeling, peer ratings, junior high school students, GLOBE framework
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review