Response time declined across dashboard trials in all conditions, with no statistically significant difference between mirroring, alerting, and advising conditions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 Response time decreased significantly as trials progressed (η2 = .68). → van Leeuwen 2019 q3 i? There was no main effect of dashboard condition on response time; the study did not detect a difference between the three conditions. → van Leeuwen 2019

Evidence¶

van Leeuwen 2019¶

van Leeuwen, A., Rummel, N., & van Gog, T. (2019). What information should CSCL teacher dashboards provide to help teachers interpret CSCL situations? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 14, 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09299-x

q3 · i3 · causal · r?

Mixed ANOVA in the between-subjects experiment (n = 53; 18 mirroring, 17 alerting, 18 advising) with 8 trials as within-subjects factor. A significant trial-number effect on response time, F(1,50) = 93.21, η2 = .68 (large), but "no main effect of condition" on speed; equivalence was not tested. Mean times were about 59-69 seconds per situation.

"showed that there was indeed an effect of trial number on participants’ response time, F(1,50) = 93.21, p <. 0 0 1 ,η2 = .68, but no main effect of condition, F(2,50) = 1.35, p = .27"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Mirroring dashboards improved teacher situational awareness while alerting-and-guiding dashboards reduced teacher workload and frustration — related
• Real-time AI alerts can expand teachers' situational awareness but in some cases overload teachers' attention or draw focus away from their own observation flow — related
• Dashboard support type did not influence detection of CSCL events but did influence teachers' interpretation of the situation — related