Cited by 83Reflective Practices in EducationOnline Learning and AnalyticsStudent Assessment and Feedback

Reflective writing analytics for actionable feedback

Open access
Gibson, Andrew, Aitken, Adam, Sándor, Ágnes, Buckingham Shum, Simon, Tsingos-Lucas, Cherie, Knight, Simon·2017·Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference

Abstract

Reflective writing can provide a powerful way for students to integrate professional experience and academic learning. However, writing reflectively requires high quality actionable feedback, which is time-consuming to provide at scale. This paper reports progress on the design, implementation, and validation of a Reflective Writing Analytics platform to provide actionable feedback within a tertiary authentic assessment context. The contributions are: (1) a new conceptual framework for reflective writing; (2) a computational approach to modelling reflective writing, deriving analytics, and providing feedback; (3) the pedagogical and user experience rationale for platform design decisions; and (4) a pilot in a student learning context, with preliminary data on educator and student acceptance, and the extent to which we can evidence that the software provided actionable feedback for reflective writing.

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 · 10.1145/3027385.3027436

Cites

41 of 41 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

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?

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: 3

  1. Rosanne Birney. 2012. Reflective Writing: antitative Assessment and Identifica- tion of Linguistic Features. Ph.D. Dissertation. Waterford Institute of Technology.
  2. Simon Knight, Simon Buckingham Shum, Phillipa Ryan, Ágnes Sándor, and Xi- aolong Wang. in press. Academic Writing Analytics for Civil Law: Participatory Design rough Academic and Student Engagement. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education (in press).
  3. Jack Mezirow. 1990. How critical reflection triggers transformative learning. Fostering critical reflection in adulthood 1 (1990), 20.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gibson, A., Aitken, A., Sándor, Á., Buckingham Shum, S., Tsingos-Lucas, C., & Knight, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Technology Sydney (AU)
  • Xerox Research Centre Europe, Meylan, France
  • University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Venue
Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference
Publisher
ACM
Published
2017-03-13
Pages
153-162
OpenAlex
W2592147208
Cited by
83
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 3
FWCI
76.43
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK) (publishedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Reflective Practices in Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
Keywords
reflective writing, actionable feedback, writing analytics, automated feedback, authentic assessment, higher education, platform design, student acceptance

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