Use alert-guided dashboard support so teachers can concentrate on interpreting student answers while the system flags critical collaboration moments¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 6 claims (5 for, 1 against) · 3 studies (2 causal, 1 theoretical), q2 · 1 of 3 report an effect size · 6 claims rest on one study

Description¶

Under guiding support, automatic alerts flag critical moments (e.g. missing keywords, slow submissions or voting) so that alerts "are very quick to read and do not disturb my tasks, they are helpful to react to certain moments of the activity". Teachers reacted to alerts by increasing time, pausing the activity to give guidelines, posting predefined messages to lagging groups, and making announcements about time and phase transitions. All six teachers agreed the alerts provided guidance to act and their number was adequate.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Alert criteria tuned to the activity structure; one teacher proposed making thresholds (e.g. half of allocated time) a teacher-modifiable parameter for activities with longer discussion and rating phases

Constraints¶

• Reaction to alerts depended on classroom constraints such as overall available activity time, and alerts could feel redundant when the teacher was already attending to the displayed information, feeling "a bit annoying – as offering information I already knew"

Target Learners¶

• teachers orchestrating collaborative activities in co-located classrooms

Target Learning Goals¶

• timely detection and remediation of problematic group participation during scripted collaboration

Claims¶

• Guiding dashboard support enabled teachers to perform more orchestration actions, more targeted interactions, and more class announcements than mirroring support [+W]
• Guiding support stimulated targeted interactions: teachers posted more messages to groups (14 vs 4) and performed more dashboard interventions than under mirroring [+W]
• Teachers reported the highest confidence in their situational awareness in the alerting & guiding dashboard condition [+W]
• The alerting & guiding dashboard did not increase teacher coregulation more than the mirroring dashboard (H3 not supported); mirroring increased intervention rates (non-significant) while guiding-condition interventions were rare and mostly coregulation strategies [-W]
• Mirroring dashboards improved teacher situational awareness while alerting-and-guiding dashboards reduced teacher workload and frustration [+W]
• The alerting & guiding dashboard reduced teachers' overall workload more than the mirroring dashboard in authentic settings (H2 supported) [+W]

Related Strategies¶

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Ishari Amarasinghe; Davinia Hernández-Leo; H. Ulrich Hoppe (2021). Deconstructing orchestration load: comparing teacher support through mirroring and guiding. Intern. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-021-09351-9