Weekly learning analytics reports served teachers in a flipped course primarily as a diagnosis tool, mentioned by all seven teachers.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Teachers used weekly LA reports to diagnose student activities at working group level, which was the most frequently mentioned function. → Anouschka van Leeuwen 2019

Evidence¶

Anouschka van Leeuwen 2019¶

Anouschka van Leeuwen. (2019). Teachers’ perceptions of the usability of learning analytics reports in a flipped university course: when and how does information become actionable knowledge? Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-09639-y

q2 · i? · qualitative · r2

Qualitative study of seven teachers in a flipped university course, using weekly logbooks and interviews over eight weeks; Table 2 shows the diagnosis functions drew the largest number of teacher mentions. Teachers reported that "The first and most frequently mentioned function of the LA reports was diagnosing".

"The first and most frequently mentioned function of the LA reports was diagnosing, which was mentioned by all teachers."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Teachers' main challenge was transitioning from diagnosis to intervention, with less experienced teachers more hesitant to act on LA report information. — related
• Teachers reported that learning analytics reports encouraged them to start interaction with students by referring to the report. — related
• Teachers accessed the OUA dashboard infrequently and irregularly, mostly around assignment submission weeks — related
• Teachers used the course average displayed on LA reports as a baseline to decide whether intervention was needed, illustrating the comparison principle. — a narrower finding that bears on this claim