Cited by 84Online Learning and AnalyticsIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Learning analytics to support teachers during synchronous CSCL: balancing between overview and overload

Open access
Van Leeuwen, Anouschka·2015·Journal of Learning Analytics

Abstract

Learning analytics (LA) are summaries, visualizations, and analyses of student data that could improve learning in multiple ways, for example by supporting teachers. However, not much empirical evidence is available yet concerning the effects of LA on how teachers diagnose student progress and intervene during students’ learning activities. The goal of this paper is to summarize the empirical work that was undertaken recently concerning the effect of various types of LA tools on teacher regulation of collaboration groups of students, and to describe the theoretical mechanisms by which LA tools may support teachers in synchronous, moment-to-moment regulation of computer-supported collaborative learning. The hypothesized mechanisms are that LA tools can 1) aggregate information to a manageable level and thereby lower information load, 2) steer the focus of the teacher’s attention, and 3) increase the teacher’s confidence concerning the diagnosis of the situation. In the final section, the role of teacher goals and beliefs in the use of LA tools is discussed, which is argued should be kept in mind when implementing LA in classroom situations.

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 · 10.18608/jla.2015.22.11

Cites

44 of 44 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?

  • If a tool design primarily makes teachers feel validated in their existing beliefs, even when those beliefs are incorrect, it risks maintaining or even amplifying inequitable patterns of teacher behavior.

    “if a tool design has the primary effect of making teachers feel validated in their existing beliefs, even when these beliefs are incorrect, then this design risks maintaining or even amplifying inequitable patterns of teacher behavior”

    From Equity and Artificial Intelligence in Education: Will "AIEd" Amplify or Alleviate Inequities in Education? (2021) · cites this paper as van Leeuwen, 2015

    Section 2.2 says learning analytics can confirm teachers’ impressions and increase confidence in their diagnoses. Section 4.2 describes tools informing subsequent interventions. The paper does not address validation of incorrect beliefs or the risk of maintaining or amplifying inequitable teacher behavior. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Different methods of presenting the same underlying algorithm outputs may interact with teachers' existing decision-making biases in very different directions.

    “different methods of presentation may interact with teachers' existing decision-making biases in very different directions”

    From Equity and Artificial Intelligence in Education: Will "AIEd" Amplify or Alleviate Inequities in Education? (2021) · cites this paper as van Leeuwen 2015

    Section 2.1 describes teacher decision-making as an interplay between information presented by the digital interface and how teachers process it. Section 2.3 reports different effects for different learning-analytics tools. The paper does not establish that different presentations of the same algorithm outputs interact with existing decision-making biases in different directions. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. De Laat, M., Chamrada, M., & Wegerif, R. (2008). Facilitate the facilitator: Awareness tools to support the moderator to facilitate online discussions for networked learning. In V. Hodgson, C. Jones, T. Kargidis, D. McConnell, S. Retalis, D. Stamatis, M. Zenios (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 80-86). Lancaster, UK: University of Lancaster.
  2. Endsley, M. R., Bolte, B., & Jones, D. G. (2003). Designing for situation awareness: An approach to human-centered design. London: Taylor & Francis.
  3. Ertmer, P. A., & Glazewski, K. D. (2015). Essentials for PBL implementation: Fostering collaboration, transforming roles, and scaffolding learning. In A. Walker, H. Leary, C. Hmelo-Silver, P. A. Ertmer (Eds.), Essential readings in problem-based learning (pp. 89-106). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Van Leeuwen, A.
Venue
Journal of Learning Analytics
Published
2015-12-07
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
138-162
ISSN
1929-7750 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2200572292
Cited by
84
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1
FWCI
8.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Learning Analytics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
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
learning analytics, teacher support, information overload, information aggregation, teacher attention, teacher confidence

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