Cited by 19Online and Blended LearningOnline Learning and AnalyticsStudent Assessment and Feedback

Engaging online students through peer-comparison progress dashboards

Open access
Smith, Paula·2019·Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education

Abstract

Purpose Students studying exclusively online face the challenge of gauging their progress in relation to that of their disparate peers. The purpose of this paper is to describe the creation of a student progress “dashboard” in an online Masters programme, and the perceived effectiveness of the tool for engaging students. Design/methodology/approach Tableau® visualisation software was used to create a dashboard displaying cohort comparison data comprising metrics relating to the continuous assessment components of the Masters programme. An anonymous questionnaire gauged students’ perceptions of the dashboard. Findings Feedback from students (n=137) suggests the dashboard improved their motivation, incentivising change in study behaviours, and sense of belonging to an online community of learners. It also acted as a conversation catalyst between staff and students, whereby students more readily engaged in dialogue with their personal tutor. Practical implications Distance learners are more likely to feel isolated and can become demotivated, which contributes to typically higher levels of withdrawal from online programmes vs those delivered on-campus. Tutors may consider communicating progress data as dashboards to enable online students to monitor their academic progress alongside that of their peers, as a motivational tool in an otherwise disparate group of learners, and to reduce feelings of isolation by reminding distance learners that they are part of a larger online community. Originality/value This paper shares student and tutor perspectives on the use of dashboards to increase online students’ motivation, and examines whether the benefits of a peer-comparison dashboard are reserved for high-achieving students.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/jarhe-11-2018-0249

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smith, P.
Affiliations
University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Smith, Paula
Venue
Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2019-05-02
Volume
12
Issue
1
Pages
38-56
ISSN
  • 1758-1184 (ISSN-L)
  • 2050-7003
OpenAlex
W2945266817
Cited by
19
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2
FWCI
2.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
Keywords
online students, peer comparison, student motivation, distance education, student isolation, sense of belonging, personal tutors, student-teacher interaction, student withdrawal, academic progress monitoring

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