Article Sidebar

Submitted
Sep 3, 2019
Accepted
Sep 6, 2019
Published
Oct 12, 2019
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 1315 Download : 804

Main Article Content

Abstract

The contribution describes and problematizes the use of learning analytics within a blended university course based on a socio-constructivist approach and aimed at constructing artefacts and knowledge. Specifically, the authors focus on the evaluation system adopted in the course, deliberately inspired by the principles of formative assessment: an ongoing evaluation in the form of feedback shared with the students, and which integrates the teacher's evaluation with self-evaluation and peer-evaluation. This system obviously requires the integration of qualitative procedures - from teachers and tutors - and quantitative - managed through the reporting functions of the LMS and online tools used for the course. The contribution ends with a reflection on the possibilities of technological development of learning analytics within the learning environment, such as to better support constructivist teaching: Learning Analytics that comes closest to social LA techniques providing the teacher with a richer picture of the student's behaviour and learning processes.

Keywords

Learning Analytics Blended Learning Moodle Formative Assessment

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The author declares that the submitted to Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society (Je-LKS) is original and that is has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
The author agrees that SIe-L (Italian Society of e-Learning) has the right to publish the material sent for inclusion in the journal Je-LKS.
The author agree that articles may be published in digital format (on the Internet or on any digital support and media) and in printed format, including future re-editions, in any language and in any license including proprietary licenses, creative commons license or open access license. SIe-L may also use parts of the work to advertise and promote the publication.
The author declares s/he has all the necessary rights to authorize the editor and SIe-L to publish the work.
The author assures that the publication of the work in no way infringes the rights of third parties, nor violates any penal norms and absolves SIe-L from all damages and costs which may result from publication.

The author declares further s/he has received written permission without limits of time, territory, or language from the rights holders for the free use of all images and parts of works still covered by copyright, without any cost or expenses to SIe-L.

For all the information please check the Ethical Code of Je-LKS, available at http://www.je-lks.org/index.php/ethical-code

How to Cite
Sansone, N., & Cesareni, D. (2019). Which Learning Analytics for a socio-constructivist teaching and learning blended experience?. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 15(3), 319-329. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135047

References

  1. Brown G. T. L., & Harris L. R. (2013), Student self-assessment, in J. H. McMillan (ed.) The SAGE handbook of research on classroom assessment. 367-393, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage.
  2. Cesareni D., Cacciamani S., Fujita N. (2016), Role taking and knowledge building in a blended university course, International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. 11 (1), 9-39 DOI 10.1007 / s11412-015-9224-0.
  3. Cesareni D., Ligorio M.B., Sansone N. (2019), Fare e collaborare. L’approccio trialogico nella didattica, Milano, Franco Angeli.
  4. De Liddo A., Buckingham Shum S., Quinto I., Bachler M., & Cannavacciuolo L. (2011), Discourse-centric learning analytics. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, (pp. 23-33). Banff, Alberta, Canada
  5. Dochy F., & McDowell L. (1997), Assessment as a tool for learning. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23, 279–298.
  6. Ferguson R., & Buckingham Shum S. (2011), Learning analytics to identify exploratory dialogue within synchronous text chat. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, (pp. 99- 103). Banff, Alberta, Canada.
  7. Ferguson R., & Buckingham Shum S. (2012), Social learning analytics: five approaches. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, (pp. 23- 33). Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  8. Gielen S., Dochy F., & Dierick S. (2003), Evaluating the consequential validity of new modes of assessment: The influence of assessment on learning, including pre-, post-, and true assessment effects, in: M. S. R. Segers, F. Dochy, & E. Cascallar (eds.), Optimising new modes of assessment: In search of qualities and standards. 35-54, Dordrecht/Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  9. Landauer T., Foltz P., & Laham D. (1998), An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Process, 25(2-3), 259-284.
  10. Ligorio M.B., & Sansone N. (2016), Manuale di didattica blended: il modello della Partecipazione Collaborativa e Costruttiva (PCC), Milano, Franco Angeli.
  11. Mercer N. (2000), Words and Minds: How We Use Language To Think Together, London, Routledge.
  12. Mercer N., & Wegerif R. (1999), Is “exploratory talk” productive talk?, Learning with computers: analysing productive interaction, New York, Routledge.
  13. Paavola S., Lakkala M., Muukkonen H., Kosone K. & Karlgren K. (2011), The roles and uses of design principles for developing the trialogical approach on learning, Research in Learning Technology, 19 (3), 233-246.
  14. Sambell K., McDowell L., & Brown S. (1997), ‘But is it fair?’ an exploratory study of student perceptions of the consequential validity of assessment Studies”, Educational Evaluation, 23, 349-371.
  15. Scardamalia M., & Bereiter C. (2006), Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology, in: K. Sawyer (ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. 97-118, New York, Cambridge University Press.
  16. Siemens G. (2010, August 25), What Are Learning Analytics?. [web log post] Elearnspace.org., URL: http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2010/08/25/what-are-learning-analytics.
  17. Siemens, G. (2012). Learning Analytics: Envisioning a Research Discipline and a Domain of Practice. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK 2012)(pp. 04-08).New York, USA: ACM.
  18. (13) (PDF) Learning Analytics: Principles and Constraints. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/278940599_Learning_Analytics_Principles_and_Constraints [accessed Jul 30 2019].
  19. Thomason N., & Rider Y. (2008), Cognitive and pedagogical benefits of argument mapping: L.A.M.P. guides the way to better thinking, in A. Okada, S. Buckingham Shum, & T. Sherborne (eds), Knowledge Cartography: Software Tools and Mapping Techniques. 113-130), London, Springer.
  20. Zimmerman B.J. (2001), Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview and analysis, in: B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement. 1-37 Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.