Learning Design and Learning Analytics: Snapshot 2020

Leah P. Macfadyen, Lori Lockyer, B. Rienties
{"title":"Learning Design and Learning Analytics: Snapshot 2020","authors":"Leah P. Macfadyen, Lori Lockyer, B. Rienties","doi":"10.18608/jla.2020.73.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"“Learning design” belongs to that interesting class of concepts that appear on the surface to be simple and self-explanatory, but which are actually definitionally vague and contested in practice. Like “learning analytics,” the field of learning design aspires to improve teaching practice, the learning experience, and learning outcomes. And like learning analytics, this interdisciplinary field also lacks a shared language, common vocabulary, or agreement over its definition and purpose, resulting in uncertainty even about who its practitioners are — Educators? Designers? Researchers? All of these? (Law, Li, Farias Herrera, Chan & Pong, 2017). Almost a decade ago, however, learning analytics researchers pointed to the rich potential for synergies between learning analytics and learning design (Lockyer & Dawson, 2011). These authors (and others since, as cited below) argued that effective alignment of learning analytics and learning design would benefit both fields, and would offer educators and investigators the evidence they need that their efforts and innovations in learning design are “worth it” in terms of improving teaching practice and learning: \"The integration of research related to both learning design and learning analytics provides the necessary contextual overlay to better understand observed student behavior and provide the necessary pedagogical recommendations where learning behavior deviates from pedagogical intention\" (Lockyer & Dawson, 2011, p. 155).","PeriodicalId":145357,"journal":{"name":"J. Learn. Anal.","volume":"1997 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Learn. Anal.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2020.73.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

Abstract

“Learning design” belongs to that interesting class of concepts that appear on the surface to be simple and self-explanatory, but which are actually definitionally vague and contested in practice. Like “learning analytics,” the field of learning design aspires to improve teaching practice, the learning experience, and learning outcomes. And like learning analytics, this interdisciplinary field also lacks a shared language, common vocabulary, or agreement over its definition and purpose, resulting in uncertainty even about who its practitioners are — Educators? Designers? Researchers? All of these? (Law, Li, Farias Herrera, Chan & Pong, 2017). Almost a decade ago, however, learning analytics researchers pointed to the rich potential for synergies between learning analytics and learning design (Lockyer & Dawson, 2011). These authors (and others since, as cited below) argued that effective alignment of learning analytics and learning design would benefit both fields, and would offer educators and investigators the evidence they need that their efforts and innovations in learning design are “worth it” in terms of improving teaching practice and learning: "The integration of research related to both learning design and learning analytics provides the necessary contextual overlay to better understand observed student behavior and provide the necessary pedagogical recommendations where learning behavior deviates from pedagogical intention" (Lockyer & Dawson, 2011, p. 155).
学习设计和学习分析:快照2020
“学习设计”属于一类有趣的概念,表面上看起来很简单,不言自明,但实际上在定义上是模糊的,并且在实践中存在争议。与“学习分析”一样,学习设计领域渴望改善教学实践、学习体验和学习成果。就像学习分析学一样,这个跨学科领域也缺乏一种共享的语言、共同的词汇,或者对其定义和目的的一致意见,导致甚至不确定谁是它的实践者——教育者?设计师吗?研究人员?所有这些?(Law, Li, Farias Herrera, Chan & Pong, 2017)。然而,大约十年前,学习分析研究人员指出了学习分析和学习设计之间的巨大协同潜力(Lockyer & Dawson, 2011)。这些作者认为,学习分析和学习设计的有效结合将使这两个领域受益,并将为教育者和研究者提供他们所需的证据,证明他们在学习设计方面的努力和创新在改善教学实践和学习方面是“值得的”:“与学习设计和学习分析相关的研究的整合提供了必要的上下文覆盖,以更好地理解观察到的学生行为,并在学习行为偏离教学意图时提供必要的教学建议”(Lockyer & Dawson, 2011,第155页)。
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