Learning Analytics and Stakeholder Inclusion: What do We Mean When We Say "Human-Centered"?

Charles Lang, Laura Davis
{"title":"Learning Analytics and Stakeholder Inclusion: What do We Mean When We Say \"Human-Centered\"?","authors":"Charles Lang, Laura Davis","doi":"10.1145/3576050.3576110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Given the growth in interest in human-centeredness within the learning analytics community - a workshop at LAK, a special issue in the Journal of Learning Analytics and multiple papers published on the topic - it seems an appropriate time to critically evaluate the popular design approach. Using a corpus of 165 publications that have substantial reference to both learning analytics and human-centeredness, the following paper delineates what is meant by \"human-centered\" and then discusses what the implications are for this approach. The conclusion reached through this analysis is that when authors refer to human-centeredness in learning analytics they are largely referring to stakeholder inclusion and the means by which this can be achieved (methodologically, politically and logistically). Furthermore, the justification for stakeholder inclusion is often coached in terms of its ability to develop more effective learning analytics applications along several dimensions (efficiency, efficacy, impact). With reference to human-centered design in other fields a discussion follows of the issues with such an approach and a prediction that LA will likely move toward a more neutral stance on stakeholder inclusion, as has occurred in both human-centered design and stakeholder engagement research in the past. A more stakeholder-neutral stance is defined as one in which stakeholder inclusion is one of many tools utilized in developing learning analytics applications.","PeriodicalId":394433,"journal":{"name":"LAK23: 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LAK23: 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3576050.3576110","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Given the growth in interest in human-centeredness within the learning analytics community - a workshop at LAK, a special issue in the Journal of Learning Analytics and multiple papers published on the topic - it seems an appropriate time to critically evaluate the popular design approach. Using a corpus of 165 publications that have substantial reference to both learning analytics and human-centeredness, the following paper delineates what is meant by "human-centered" and then discusses what the implications are for this approach. The conclusion reached through this analysis is that when authors refer to human-centeredness in learning analytics they are largely referring to stakeholder inclusion and the means by which this can be achieved (methodologically, politically and logistically). Furthermore, the justification for stakeholder inclusion is often coached in terms of its ability to develop more effective learning analytics applications along several dimensions (efficiency, efficacy, impact). With reference to human-centered design in other fields a discussion follows of the issues with such an approach and a prediction that LA will likely move toward a more neutral stance on stakeholder inclusion, as has occurred in both human-centered design and stakeholder engagement research in the past. A more stakeholder-neutral stance is defined as one in which stakeholder inclusion is one of many tools utilized in developing learning analytics applications.
学习分析和利益相关者包容:当我们说“以人为本”时,我们意味着什么?
考虑到学习分析社区对以人为本的兴趣的增长——LAK的一个研讨会、《学习分析杂志》的一个特刊以及关于该主题的多篇论文——现在似乎是对流行的设计方法进行批判性评估的合适时机。下面的文章使用165个出版物的语料库,这些出版物对学习分析和以人为中心都有实质性的参考,描述了“以人为中心”的含义,然后讨论了这种方法的含义。通过这一分析得出的结论是,当作者在学习分析中提到以人为中心时,他们主要指的是利益相关者的包容以及实现这一目标的手段(方法上、政治上和逻辑上)。此外,涉众参与的理由通常是根据其沿着几个维度(效率、功效、影响)开发更有效的学习分析应用程序的能力来指导的。参考其他领域的以人为中心的设计,接下来将讨论这种方法的问题,并预测洛杉矶可能会在利益相关者包容方面采取更中立的立场,就像过去在以人为中心的设计和利益相关者参与研究中所发生的那样。一个更加利益相关者中立的立场被定义为一个利益相关者包含是在开发学习分析应用程序中使用的许多工具之一。
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