Using log variables in a learning management system to evaluate learning activity using the lens of activity theory

References

• Baker, R. S., and K. Yacef. 2009. “The State of Educational Data Mining in 2009: A Review and Future Visions.” JEDM-Journal of Educational Data Mining 1 (1): 3–17.
   Google Scholar
• Barab, S. A., M. Barnett, L. Yamagata-Lynch, K. Squire, and T. Keating. 2002. “Using Activity Theory to Understand the Systemic Tensions Characterizing a Technology-rich Introductory Astronomy Course.” Mind, Culture, and Activity 9 (2): 76–107.10.1207/S15327884MCA0902_02
   Google Scholar
• Benson, A., C. Lawler, and A. Whitworth. 2008. “Rules, Roles and Tools: Activity Theory and the Comparative Study of E-learning.” British Journal of Educational Technology 39 (3): 456–467.10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00838.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertelsen, O. W., and S. Bødker. 2003. “Activity theory.” In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), HCI Models, Theories, and Frameworks: Toward a Multidisciplinary Science, (pp. 291–324). New York: Morgan Kaufmann.10.1016/B978-155860808-5/50011-3
   Google Scholar
• Blin, F., and M. Munro. 2008. “Why Hasn’t Technology Disrupted Academics’ Teaching Practices? Understanding Resistance to Change through the Lens of Activity Theory.” Computers & Education 50 (2): 475–490.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brill, J. M., and Y. Park. 2011. “Evaluating Online Tutorials for University Faculty, Staff, and Students: The Contribution of Just-in-Time Online Resources to Learning and Performance.” International Journal on E-Learning 10 (1): 5–26.
   Google Scholar
• Carvalho, A., N. Areal, and J. Silva. 2011. “Students’ Perceptions of Blackboard and Moodle in a Portuguese University.” British Journal of Educational Technology 42 (5): 824–841.10.1111/bjet.2011.42.issue-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chatti, M. A., A. L. Dyckhoff, U. Schroeder, and H. Thüs. 2012. “A Reference Model for Learning Analytics.” International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning 4 (5/6): 318–331.10.1504/IJTEL.2012.051815
   Google Scholar
• Cole, M., and Y. Engeström. 1993. “A Cultural-Historical Approach.” In Distributed Cognitions: Psychological and Educational Considerations, edited by G. Salomon, 203–266. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dyke, M., G. Conole, A. Ravenscroft, and S. de Freitas. 2007. “Learning theory and its application to e-learning.” In G. Conole & M. Oliver (Eds.), Contemporary Perspectives in E-learning Research: Themes, Methods, and Impact on Practice (pp. 82–97). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 1987. Learning by Expanding. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 1991. “Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation.” Multidisciplinary Newsletter for Activity Theory 7 (8): 14–15.
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 1999. “Innovative Learning in Work Teams.” In Perspectives on Activity Theory, edited by Y. Engestrom, R. Miettinen, and R.-L. Punamaki, 114–153. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511812774
   Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y., R. Miettinen, and R.-L. Punamakin, eds. 1999. Perspectives on Activity Theory. New York: Cambridge University of Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Florian, B., C. Glahn, H. Drachsler, M. Specht, and R. F. Gesa. 2011. “Activity-based Learner-Models for Learner Monitoring and Recommendations in Moodle.” In Towards Ubiquitous Learning, 111–124. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Francis, R., and J. Raftery. 2005. “Blended Learning Landscapes.” Brookes eJournal of Learning and Teaching 1 (3): 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Frohberg, D., C. Goth, and G. Schwabe. 2009. “Mobile Learning Projects – A Critical Analysis of the State of the Art.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25: 307–331.10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00315.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Issroff, K., and E. Scanlon. 2002. “Using Technology in Higher Education: An Activity Theory Perspective.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 18 (1): 77–83.10.1046/j.0266-4909.2001.00213.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D. 2000. “Revisiting Activity Theory as a Framework for Designing Student-centered Learning Environments.” In Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, edited by D. H. Jonassen and S. M. Land, 89–121. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D., and L. Rohrer-Murphy. 1999. “Activity Theory as a Framework for Designing Constructivist Learning Environments.” Educational Technology Research and Development 47 (1): 61–79.10.1007/BF02299477
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaptelinin, V., and B. A. Nardi. 2006. Acting with Technology. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Karasavvidis, I. 2009a. “Activity Theory as a Conceptual Framework for Understanding Teacher Approaches to Information and Communication Technologies.” Computers & Education 53 (2): 436–444.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karasavvidis, I. 2009b. “Activity Theory as a Theoretical Framework for the Study of Blended Learning: A Case Study.” Paper presented at the proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Networked Learning, Halkidiki, Greece.
   Google Scholar
• Kuutti, K. 1996. “Activity Theory as a Potential Framework for Human–Computer Interaction Research.” In Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction, edited by B. A. Nardi, 17–44. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leont’ev, A. N. 1978. Activity, Consciousness, and Personality. Translated by M. J. Hall. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Luria, A. R. 1981. Language and Cognition. Washington, DC: Winston.
   Google Scholar
• MEST (Ministry of Education, Science and Technology of the Republic of Korea). 2011. Smart Education Promotion Strategy, President’s Council on National ICT Strategies. Retrieved from http://www.moe.go.kr/newsearch/search.jsp
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, M., G. Roberts, H. Beetham, B. Ingraham, M. Dyke, and P. Levy. 2007. “Knowledge, society and perspectives on learning technology.” In G. C. M. Oliver (Ed.), Contemporary Perspectives in E-learning Research: Themes, Methods and Impact on Practice, (pp. 21–37). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Romero, C., P. G. Espejo, A. Zafra, J. R. Romero, and S. Ventura. 2013. “Web Usage Mining for Predicting Final Marks of Students That Use Moodle Courses.” Computer Applications in Engineering Education 21 (1): 135–146.10.1002/cae.v21.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romero, C., S. Ventura, and E. García. 2008. “Data Mining in Course Management Systems: Moodle Case Study and Tutorial.” Computers & Education 51 (1): 368–384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, W.-M., and Y.-J. Lee. 2007. “‘Vygotsky’s Neglected Legacy’: Cultural-historical Activity Theory.” Review of Educational Research 77 (2): 186–232.10.3102/0034654306298273
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scanlon, E., and K. Issroff. 2005. “Activity Theory and Higher Education: Evaluating Learning Technologies.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21 (6): 430–439.10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00153.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharples, M., J. Taylor, and G. Vavoula. 2007. “A Theory of Learning for the Mobile Age.” In The Sage Handbook of Elearning Research, edited by R. Andrews and C. Haythornthwaite, 221–247. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Siemens, G., D. Gasevic, C. Haythornthwaite, S. Dawson, S. B. Shum, R. Ferguson, … R. S. J. D. Baker. 2011. “Open Learning Analytics: an integrated & modularized platform.” (Doctoral dissertation, Open University Press).
   Google Scholar
• Slade, S., and P. Prinsloo. 2013. “Learning Analytics: Ethical Issues and Dilemmas.” American Behavioral Scientist 57 (10): 1510–1529.10.1177/0002764213479366
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, J., M. Sharples, C. O’Malley, G. Vavoula, and J. Waycott. 2006. “Towards a Task Model for Mobile Learning: A Dialectical Approach.” International Journal of Learning Technology 2: 138–158.10.1504/IJLT.2006.010616
   Google Scholar
• Uden, L. 2007. “Activity Theory for Designing Mobile Learning.” International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation 1 (1): 81–102.10.1504/IJMLO.2007.011190
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. London: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Witten, I. H., & Frank, E. 2005. Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques. New York: Morgan Kaufmann.
   Google Scholar
• Zurita, G., and M. Nussbaum. 2007. “A Conceptual Framework Based on Activity Theory for Mobile CSCL.” British Journal of Educational Technology 38 (2): 211–235.10.1111/bjet.2007.38.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar