高等教育学习分析仪表板研究综述:对公正、公平、多样性和包容性的影响

K. Williamson, René F. Kizilcec
{"title":"高等教育学习分析仪表板研究综述:对公正、公平、多样性和包容性的影响","authors":"K. Williamson, René F. Kizilcec","doi":"10.1145/3506860.3506900","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Learning analytics dashboards (LADs) are becoming more prevalent in higher education to help students, faculty, and staff make data-informed decisions. Despite extensive research on the design and implementation of LADs, few studies have investigated their relation to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI). Excluding these issues in LAD research limits the potential benefits of LADs generally and risks reinforcing long-standing inequities in education. We conducted a critical literature review, identifying 45 relevant papers to answer three research questions: how is LAD research improving JEDI, ii. how might it maintain or exacerbate inequitable outcomes, and iii. what opportunities exist in this space to improve JEDI in higher education. Using thematic analysis, we identified four common themes: (1) participant identities and researcher positionality, (2) surveillance concerns, (3) implicit pedagogies, and (4) software development resources. While we found very few studies directly addressing or mentioning JEDI concepts, we used these themes to explore ways researchers could consider JEDI in their studies. Our investigation highlights several opportunities to intentionally incorporate JEDI into LAD research by sharing software resources and conducting cross-border collaborations, better incorporating user needs, and centering considerations of justice in LAD efforts to improve historical inequities.","PeriodicalId":185465,"journal":{"name":"LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference","volume":"168 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Review of Learning Analytics Dashboard Research in Higher Education: Implications for Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion\",\"authors\":\"K. Williamson, René F. Kizilcec\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3506860.3506900\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Learning analytics dashboards (LADs) are becoming more prevalent in higher education to help students, faculty, and staff make data-informed decisions. Despite extensive research on the design and implementation of LADs, few studies have investigated their relation to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI). Excluding these issues in LAD research limits the potential benefits of LADs generally and risks reinforcing long-standing inequities in education. We conducted a critical literature review, identifying 45 relevant papers to answer three research questions: how is LAD research improving JEDI, ii. how might it maintain or exacerbate inequitable outcomes, and iii. what opportunities exist in this space to improve JEDI in higher education. Using thematic analysis, we identified four common themes: (1) participant identities and researcher positionality, (2) surveillance concerns, (3) implicit pedagogies, and (4) software development resources. While we found very few studies directly addressing or mentioning JEDI concepts, we used these themes to explore ways researchers could consider JEDI in their studies. Our investigation highlights several opportunities to intentionally incorporate JEDI into LAD research by sharing software resources and conducting cross-border collaborations, better incorporating user needs, and centering considerations of justice in LAD efforts to improve historical inequities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":185465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference\",\"volume\":\"168 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506900\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3506860.3506900","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

学习分析仪表板(LADs)在高等教育中变得越来越普遍,它可以帮助学生、教师和工作人员做出基于数据的决策。尽管对lad的设计和实施进行了广泛的研究,但很少有研究调查其与正义、公平、多样性和包容性(JEDI)的关系。在LAD研究中排除这些问题通常会限制LAD的潜在益处,并有可能加剧长期存在的教育不公平现象。我们进行了一项批判性的文献综述,确定了45篇相关论文来回答三个研究问题:LAD研究如何改善JEDI;它会如何维持或加剧不公平的结果?在这个领域中存在哪些机会来改善高等教育中的绝地武士。通过主题分析,我们确定了四个共同的主题:(1)参与者身份和研究人员的位置,(2)监控问题,(3)隐性教学法,以及(4)软件开发资源。虽然我们发现很少有研究直接涉及或提到JEDI概念,但我们使用这些主题来探索研究人员在他们的研究中考虑JEDI的方法。我们的调查强调了几个机会,通过共享软件资源和开展跨境合作,更好地结合用户需求,以及在LAD努力中集中考虑正义,以改善历史不平等,有意地将JEDI纳入LAD研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Review of Learning Analytics Dashboard Research in Higher Education: Implications for Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
Learning analytics dashboards (LADs) are becoming more prevalent in higher education to help students, faculty, and staff make data-informed decisions. Despite extensive research on the design and implementation of LADs, few studies have investigated their relation to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI). Excluding these issues in LAD research limits the potential benefits of LADs generally and risks reinforcing long-standing inequities in education. We conducted a critical literature review, identifying 45 relevant papers to answer three research questions: how is LAD research improving JEDI, ii. how might it maintain or exacerbate inequitable outcomes, and iii. what opportunities exist in this space to improve JEDI in higher education. Using thematic analysis, we identified four common themes: (1) participant identities and researcher positionality, (2) surveillance concerns, (3) implicit pedagogies, and (4) software development resources. While we found very few studies directly addressing or mentioning JEDI concepts, we used these themes to explore ways researchers could consider JEDI in their studies. Our investigation highlights several opportunities to intentionally incorporate JEDI into LAD research by sharing software resources and conducting cross-border collaborations, better incorporating user needs, and centering considerations of justice in LAD efforts to improve historical inequities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信