Counting Clicks is Not Enough: Validating a Theorized Model of Engagement in Learning Analytics

E. Fincham, A. Whitelock-Wainwright, Vitomir Kovanovíc, Srécko Joksimovíc, J. V. Staalduinen, D. Gašević
{"title":"Counting Clicks is Not Enough: Validating a Theorized Model of Engagement in Learning Analytics","authors":"E. Fincham, A. Whitelock-Wainwright, Vitomir Kovanovíc, Srécko Joksimovíc, J. V. Staalduinen, D. Gašević","doi":"10.1145/3303772.3303775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Student engagement is often considered an overarching construct in educational research and practice. Though frequently employed in the learning analytics literature, engagement has been subjected to a variety of interpretations and there is little consensus regarding the very definition of the construct. This raises grave concerns with regards to construct validity: namely, do these varied metrics measure the same thing? To address such concerns, this paper proposes, quantifies, and validates a model of engagement which is both grounded in the theoretical literature and described by common metrics drawn from the field of learning analytics. To identify a latent variable structure in our data we used exploratory factor analysis and validated the derived model on a separate sub-sample of our data using confirmatory factor analysis. To analyze the associations between our latent variables and student outcomes, a structural equation model was fitted, and the validity of this model across different course settings was assessed using MIMIC modeling. Across different domains, the broad consistency of our model with the theoretical literature suggest a mechanism that may be used to inform both interventions and course design.","PeriodicalId":382957,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge","volume":"216 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"33","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3303772.3303775","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 33

Abstract

Student engagement is often considered an overarching construct in educational research and practice. Though frequently employed in the learning analytics literature, engagement has been subjected to a variety of interpretations and there is little consensus regarding the very definition of the construct. This raises grave concerns with regards to construct validity: namely, do these varied metrics measure the same thing? To address such concerns, this paper proposes, quantifies, and validates a model of engagement which is both grounded in the theoretical literature and described by common metrics drawn from the field of learning analytics. To identify a latent variable structure in our data we used exploratory factor analysis and validated the derived model on a separate sub-sample of our data using confirmatory factor analysis. To analyze the associations between our latent variables and student outcomes, a structural equation model was fitted, and the validity of this model across different course settings was assessed using MIMIC modeling. Across different domains, the broad consistency of our model with the theoretical literature suggest a mechanism that may be used to inform both interventions and course design.
计数点击是不够的:验证学习分析中参与的理论模型
学生参与通常被认为是教育研究和实践的首要结构。虽然在学习分析文献中经常使用,但敬业度受到各种解释的影响,并且对于结构的定义几乎没有共识。这引起了关于构造有效性的严重关注:也就是说,这些不同的度量是否测量相同的东西?为了解决这些问题,本文提出、量化并验证了一个参与模型,该模型既基于理论文献,又由学习分析领域的通用指标描述。为了确定我们数据中的潜在变量结构,我们使用探索性因素分析,并使用验证性因素分析在我们数据的单独子样本上验证衍生模型。为了分析潜在变量与学生结果之间的关联,我们拟合了一个结构方程模型,并使用MIMIC模型评估了该模型在不同课程设置中的有效性。在不同的领域,我们的模型与理论文献的广泛一致性表明了一种可用于告知干预措施和课程设计的机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信