Advertisement

Observing the Use of e-Textbooks in the Classroom: Towards “Offline” Learning Analytics

  • Maka Eradze
  • Terje Väljataga
  • Mart LaanpereEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8699)

Abstract

Learning analytics is an emerging approach that is equally popular among researchers and educators-practitioners. Although the methods and tools for LA have been developing fast, there still exist several unsolved problems: LA is too much data driven, weakly connected to theory and is able to analyse only the activities documented in an online setting - in LMS. We propose a solution for the LA unit of analysis drawing upon the research of existing practices and tools used for offline contexts: the data is coming from the physical learning interactions based on the observations in the classroom setting and captured with classroom observation application. We argue that if the unit of analysis has a particular logic and structure, it can unleash the possibilities for “offline” analytics that can be later integrated with online LA.

Keywords

LEARMIX Learning analytics eTextbooks Unit of analysis TinCan API xAPI 

References

  1. 1.
    Stahl, G.: Theories of cognition in collaborative learning. In: Hmelo-Silver, C., O’Donnell, A., Chan, C., Chinn, C. (eds.) International Handbook of Collaborative Learning. Taylor & Francis, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Learning Analytics & Knowledge, Banff, Alberta, February 27–March 1 2011. https://tekri.athabascau.ca/analytics/
  3. 3.
    Ferguson, R.: The state of learning analytics in 2012: a review and future challenges. Technical report KMI-12-01, Knowledge Media Institute, The Open University, UK (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greller, W., Drachsler, H.: Translating learning into numbers: a generic framework for learning analytics. Educ. Technol Soc. 15(3), 42–57 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buckingam, S.S.: Learning Analytics. UNESCO Policy Brief, Enhancing Teaching and Learning Through Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics: An Issue Brief U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barab, S.A., Evans, M.A., Baek, E.O.: Activity theory as a lens for characterizing the participatory unit. In: Jonassen, D.H. (ed.) Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, pp. 199–214. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eradze, M., Pata, K., Laanpere, M.: Analyzing learning flows in digital learning ecosystems. In: Huang, Y.-M., Li, F., Jin, Q. (Toim.) Knowledge Management and E-learning. LNCS, pp. 1–10. Springer, Heidelberg (in press)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
  9. 9.
    Suthers, D. D., Rosen, D.: A unified framework for multi-level analysis of distributed learning. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, pp. 64–74. ACM, Banff, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Experience API Specification. http://tincanapi.wikispaces.com/file/view/Experience+API+Release+v0.95.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2014
  11. 11.
    Hildebrandt, M.: Privacy and identity. In: Claes, E., Duff, A., Gutwirth, S. (eds.) Privacy and the Criminal Law, pp. 61–104. Intersentia, Antwerp/Oxford (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Slade, S., Prinsloo, P.: Learning analytics: ethical issues and dilemmas. Am. Behav. Sci. 57(10), 1509–1528 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kruse, A., Pongsajapan, R.: Student-Centered Learning Analytics. https://cndls.georgetown.edu/m/documents/thoughtpaper-krusepongsajapan.pdf (2012). Accessed 20 June 2014
  14. 14.
    Baek, E., Monagham, J.: Journey to textbook affordability: an investigation of students’ use of eTextbooks at multiple campuses. Int. Rev. Res Open Distance Learn. [S.l.] 14(3), 1–26 (2013). ISSN 1492-3831. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1237. Accessed 6 June 2014Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weisberg, S.: Student attitudes and behaviors towards digital textbooks. Publishing Res. Q. 27, 188–196 (2011). SpringerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dennis, A.: e-Textbooks at Indiana University: A Summary of Two Years of Research. http://etexts.iu.edu/files/eText%20Pilot%20Data%202010-2011.pdf. Accessed 6 June 2014
  17. 17.
    Cutshall, R.C., Mollick J.S., M. Bland E.M.: Use of an e-Textbook and web-based homework for an undergraduate business course: students’ perceptions. J. Acad. Bus. Educ. 10 (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Falc, E.O.: Assessment of college students’ attitudes towards using an online e-textbook. Interdisc. J. E-learn. Learn. Objects 9, 1–12 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nicholas, D.: E-textbook use, information seeking behaviour and its impact: case study business and management. J. Inf. Sci. 36(2), 263–280 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Khurana S., Relan, M. Singh, V.K.A.: Text analytics-based approach to compute coverage, readability and comprehensibility of eBooks. In: 2013 Sixth International Conference on Contemporary Computing (IC3) (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fouh, E., Karavirta, V., Breakiron, D.A., Sally Hamouda, S., Hall, S., Naps, T.L., Shaffer, C.A.: Design and architecture of an interactive eTextbook – the OpenDSA system. Sci. Comput. Program. 88, 22–40 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Choi, J.-I., Heo, H., Lim, K.Y., Jo, I.-H.: The development of an interactive digital textbook in middle school English. In: Kim, T.-h, Adeli, H., Slezak, D., Sandnes, F.E., Song, X., Chung, K.-i, Arnett, K.P. (eds.) FGIT 2011. LNCS, vol. 7105, pp. 397–405. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Informatics, Tallinn UniversityTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations