Mediating learning with learning analytics technology: guidelines for practice

References

• Barbour, R. S. 2001. “Checklists for Improving Rigour in Qualitative Research: A Case of the Tail Wagging the Dog?” BMJ: British Medical Journal 322 (7294): 1115–1117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biesta, G. 2007. “Why ‘What Works’ Won't Work: Evidence-based Practice and the Democratic Deficit in Educational Research.” Educational Theory 57 (1): 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Bodily, R. 2018. “Open Learner Models and Learning Analytics Dashboards: A Systematic Review.” In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, 41–50. ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Bodily, R., and K. Verbert. 2017. “Trends and Issues in Student-Facing Learning Analytics Reporting Systems Research.” In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, 309–318. ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, J. G. 1990. “Teachers and Students: Constructivists Forging New Connections.” Educational Leadership 47 (5): 68–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bryant, A., and K. Charmaz. 2007. The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. 2011. “Grounded Theory Methods in Social Justice Research.” The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research 4: 359–380.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. 2014. Constructing Grounded Theory. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K., and L. Belgrave. 2012. “Qualitative Interviewing and Grounded Theory Analysis.” The SAGE Handbook of Interview Research: The Complexity of the Craft 2: 347–365.
   Google Scholar
• Clow, D. 2012. “The Learning Analytics Cycle: Closing the Loop Effectively.” In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, 134–138. ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., and V. L. P. Clark. 2007. “Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research”.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., and C. N. Poth. 2017. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. London: Sage publications.
   Google Scholar
• Dawson, S., D. Gašević, G. Siemens, and S. Joksimovic. 2014. “Current State and Future Trends: A Citation Network Analysis of the Learning Analytics Field.” In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, 231–240. ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. 1938. The Theory of Inquiry. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Wiston.
   Google Scholar
• Dyckhoff, A. L., D. Zielke, M. Bültmann, M. A. Chatti, and U. Schroeder. 2012. “Design and Implementation of a Learning Analytics Toolkit for Teachers.” Educational Technology & Society 15 (3): 58–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engeström, Y. 1999. “Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation.” Perspectives on Activity Theory 19 (38): 19–30.
   Google Scholar
• Feez, S. M. 2007. “Montessori's Mediation of Meaning: A Social Semiotic Perspective”. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Sydney. http://hdl.handle.net/2123/1859.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson, R. 2012. “Learning Analytics: Drivers, Developments and Challenges.” International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning 4 (5–6): 304–317.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson, R., and D. Clow. 2017. “Where is the Evidence? A Call to Action for Learning Analytics.” In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference, 56–65. ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Feuerstein, R., R. Feuerstein, and L. H. Falik. 2015. Beyond Smarter: Mediated Learning and the Brain's Capacity for Change. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flavell, J. H. 1979. “Metacognition and Cognitive Monitoring: A New Area of Cognitive–developmental Inquiry.” American Psychologist 34 (10): 906–911.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gašević, D., S. Dawson, and G. Siemens. 2015. “Let's Not Forget: Learning Analytics are About Learning.” TechTrends 59 (1): 64–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ge, X., and S. M. Land. 2003. “Scaffolding Students' Problem-solving Processes in An Ill-structured Task Using Question Prompts and Peer Interactions.” Educational Technology Research and Development 51 (1): 21–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, A. 1997. “Focus Groups.” Social Research Update 19 (8): 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Greenberg, S., and B. Buxton. 2008. “Usability Evaluation Considered Harmful (Some of the Time).” In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 111–120. ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Hadwin, A., and M. Oshige. 2011. “Self-regulation, Coregulation, and Socially Shared Regulation: Exploring Perspectives of Social in Self-regulated Learning Theory.” Teachers College Record 113 (2): 240–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ifenthaler, D., and J. Y.-K. Yau. 2020. “Utilising Learning Analytics to Support Study Success in Higher Education: a Systematic Review.” Educational Technology Research and Development 68 (4): 1961–1990.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khan, O. 2017. “Learners' and Teachers' Perceptions of Learning Analytics (LA): A Case Study of Southampton Solent University (SSU).” 14th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2017).
   Google Scholar
• Kozulin, A. 1998. Psychological Tools: A Sociocultural Approach to Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kozulin, A., and B. Z. Presseisen. 1995. “Mediated Learning Experience and Psychological Tools: Vygotsky's and Feuerstein's Perspectives in a Study of Student Learning.” Educational Psychologist 30 (2): 67–75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuzilek, J., M. Hlosta, Z.-Z. Herrmannova, and A. Wolff. 2015. “Ou Analyse: Analysing At-risk Students At the Open University.” Learning Analytics Review, 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Liñán, L. C., and Á. A. J. Pérez. 2015. “Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics: Differences, Similarities, and Time Evolution.” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 12 (3): 98–112.
   Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S., and N. K. Denzin. 2000. The Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Matcha, W., D. Gasevic, and A. Pardo, et al. 2019. “A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies on Learning Analytics Dashboards: A Self-regulated Learning Perspective.” IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 13 (2): 226–245.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman, D. A. 1999. “Affordance, Conventions, and Design.” Interactions 6 (3): 38–43.
   Google Scholar
• Oliver, M. 2016. “What is Technology.” In Wiley Handbook of Learning Technology, 35–57.
   Google Scholar
• Park, Y., and I.-H. Jo. 2015. “Development of the Learning Analytics Dashboard to Support Students' Learning Performance.” Journal of Universal Computer Science 21 (1): 110–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piaget, J. 1964. “Part I: Cognitive Development in Children: Piaget Development and Learning.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2 (3): 176–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pozzi, G., F. Pigni, and C. Vitari. 2014. “Affordance Theory in the is Discipline: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature”.
   Google Scholar
• Presseisen, B. Z., and A. Kozulin. 1992. “Mediated Learning–the Contributions of Vygotsky and Feuerstein in Theory and Practice”.
   Google Scholar
• Schoonenboom, J. 2014. “Using An Adapted, Task-level Technology Acceptance Model to Explain why Instructors in Higher Education Intend to Use Some Learning Management System Tools More Than Others.” Computers & Education 71 (1): 247–256.
   Google Scholar
• Schumacher, C., and D. Ifenthaler. 2018. “Features Students Really Expect From Learning Analytics.” Computers in Human Behavior 78 (1): 397–407.
   Google Scholar
• Sclater, N., A. Peasgood, and J. Mullan. 2016. Learning Analytics in Higher Education. London: JISC.
   Google Scholar
• Steiner, C. M., A. Nussbaumer, and D. Albert. 2009. “Supporting Self-regulated Personalised Learning Through Competence-based Knowledge Space Theory.” Policy Futures in Education 7 (6): 645–661.
   Google Scholar
• Tsai, Y.-S., O. Poquet, D. Gašević, S. Dawson, and A. Pardo. 2019. “Complexity Leadership in Learning Analytics: Drivers, Challenges and Opportunities.” British Journal of Educational Technology 50 (6): 2839–2854.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ukrainetz, T. A., S. Harpell, C. Walsh, and C. Coyle. 2000. “A Preliminary Investigation of Dynamic Assessment with Native American Kindergartners.” Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools 31 (2): 142–154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verbert, K., E. Duval, J. Klerkx, S. Govaerts, and J. L. Santos. 2013. “Learning Analytics Dashboard Applications.” American Behavioral Scientist 57 (10): 1500–1509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. 1986. “Thought and Language-Revised Edition”.
   Google Scholar
• Winne, P. H. 2017. “Learning Analytics for Self-Regulated Learning.” In Handbook of Learning Analytics. Beaumont, AB: Society for Learning Analytics Research.
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. 2003. “Designing Case Studies.” Qualitative Research Methods 5 (14): 359–386.
   Google Scholar
• Zilka, G. C., R. Cohen, and I. Rahimi. 2018. “Teacher Presence and Social Presence in Virtual and Blended Courses.” Journal of Information Technology Education. Research 17: 103–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerman, B. J., and D. H. Schunk. 2001. Self-regulated Learning and Academic Achievement: Theoretical Perspectives. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar