Cited by 193Data Visualization and AnalyticsOnline Learning and AnalyticsVisual and Cognitive Learning Processes

The student activity meter for awareness and self-reflection

Open access
Govaerts, Sten, Verbert, Katrien, Duval, Erik, Pardo, Abelardo·2012·CHI '12 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

Visualization of user actions can be used in Technology Enhanced Learning to increase awareness for learners and teachers and to support self-reflection. In this paper, we present our Student Activity Meter that visualizes learner actions. We present four design iterations and results of both quantitative and qualitative evaluation studies in real-world settings that assess the usability, use and usefulness of different visualizations. Results indicate that our tool is useful for a variety of teacher and learner needs, including awareness of time spent and resource use. Tools like SAM can also be deployed in other settings that require awareness and self-reflection, e.g. in personal informatics and health monitoring, where motivated users will value the flexible mechanisms to analyze trending data.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2212776.2212860

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge 2011, February 2011.
  2. Personal Informatics & HCI , CHI'11 workshop.
  3. J. Benedek and T. Miner. Measuring desirability: New methods for evaluating desirability in a usability lab setting. In Proc. of UPA Conf., 2002.
  4. M. Sedlmair et al. Cardiogram: visual analytics for automotive engineers. In CHI '11, pp 1727-1736. 2011.
  5. J. Zhao et al. Kronominer: using multi-foci navigation for the visual exploration of time-series data. In CHI '11, pp 1737-1746, 2011.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Govaerts, S., Verbert, K., Duval, E., & Pardo, A.
Affiliations
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • Universidad Carlos III de Madrid (ES)
Venue
CHI '12 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2012-05-05
Pages
869-884
OpenAlex
W2127418831
Cited by
193
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 1
FWCI
11.58
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • European Commission (231396, 2007–2013, FP7 2007-2013, FP7/2007)
  • Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
  • Vlaamse regering
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Data Visualization and Analytics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Keywords
self-reflection, awareness, technology-enhanced learning, usability evaluation, personal informatics, health monitoring, data trends

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