A handheld classroom dashboard: Teachers’ perspectives on the use of real-time collaborative learning analytics

  • Roberto Martinez-MaldonadoEmail author


In Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) classrooms it may be challenging for teachers to keep awareness of certain aspects of the learning process of each small group or assess whether the enactment of the class script deviates from the original plan. Orchestration tools, aimed at supporting the management of the increasing uncertainty and complexity of CSCL classrooms, have been emerging in response. Similarly, learning analytics innovations hold the promise of empowering teachers by making certain aspects of the classroom visible and by providing information that can prompt actionable responses. However, the active role that data may play in teachers’ decision-making and orchestration processes is still not well understood. This paper investigates the perspectives of teachers who used a real-time analytics tool to support the orchestration of a CSCL classroom. A longitudinal study was conducted with a handheld dashboard deployed in a multi-display collaborative classroom during one full academic term. The dashboard showed real-time information about group participation and task progress; the current state of the CSCL script; and a set of text notifications informing teachers of potential students’ misconceptions automatically detected. The study involved four teachers conducting 72 classroom sessions during 10 weeks with a total of 150 students. The teachers’ perspectives discussed in this paper portray the promises and challenges of introducing new technologies aimed at enhancing orchestration and awareness in a CSCL classroom.


Small group collaboration Multi-display Classroom ecologies Learning analytics Dashboard Data visualisation Learning design Tabletops 



  1. Alavi, H., Dillenbourg, P, & Kaplan, F. (2009). Distributed awareness for class orchestration. In Proceedings of European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, (pp. 211–225). Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Bannon, L. J. (1995). Issues in computer supported collaborative learning. Paper presented at the Computer supported collaborative learning, (pp. 267–281). Springer.Google Scholar
  3. Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2013). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: designing and delivering e-learning. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  4. Bienkowski, M., Feng, M., & Means, B. (2012). Enhancing teaching and learning through educational data mining and learning analytics: An issue brief. Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology.Google Scholar
  5. Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In Proceedings of ASEE National Conference, (pp. 1–18).Google Scholar
  6. Bodily, R., & Verbert, K. (2017). Trends and issues in student-facing learning analytics reporting systems research. In Proceedings of International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, LAK'17, (pp. 309–318). ACM.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bruce, B. C., & Rubin, A. (1993). Electronic quills: A situated evaluation of using computers for writing in classrooms. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Buckingham Shum, S., & Crick, R. D. (2016). Learning Analytics for 21st Century Competencies. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(2), 6–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Card, S. K., Mackinlay, J. D., & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Readings in information visualization: using vision to think. Burlington, USA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  11. Chandrasegaran, Senthil, Chris Bryan, Hidekazu Shidara, Tung-Yen Chuang, and Kwan-Liu Ma. (2019). TalkTraces: Real-Time Capture and Visualization of Verbal Content in Meetings. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI'19, (pp. 577:571--577:514). ACM.Google Scholar
  12. Cheema, S., VanLehn, K., Burkhardt, H., Pead, D., & Schoenfeld, A. (2016). Electronic posters to support formative assessment. In Proceedings of 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (pp. 1159–1164). ACM.Google Scholar
  13. Chen, F.-H., Looi, C.-K., & Chen, W. (2009). Integrating technology in the classroom: a visual conceptualization of teachers' knowledge, goals and beliefs. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(5), 470–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen, W., Looi, C.-K., & Tan, S. (2010). What do students do in a F2F CSCL classroom? The optimization of multiple communications modes. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1159–1170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clayphan, A., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Tomitsch, M., Atkinson, S., & Kay, J. (2016). An In-the-Wild Study of Learning to Brainstorm: Comparing Cards, Tabletops and Wall Displays in the Classroom. Interacting with Computers. Google Scholar
  16. Dillenbourg, P. (2013). Design for classroom orchestration. Computers & Education, 69, 485–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dillenbourg, P. (2015). Orchestration graphs. Lausanne, Switzerland: EPFL Press.Google Scholar
  18. Dillenbourg, P., & Evans, M. (2011). Interactive tabletops in education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4), 491–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dillenbourg, P., & Hong, F. (2008). The mechanics of CSCL macro scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, & S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning: principles and products (pp. 3–19). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dillenbourg, P., Prieto, L. P., & Olsen, J. K. (2018). Classroom Orchestration. In F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, & P. Reimann (Eds.), International Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 180–190). London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dillenbourg, P., Zufferey, G., Alavi, H., Jermann, P., Do-Lenh, S., Bonnard, Q., Cuendet, S., & Kaplan, F. (2011). Classroom orchestration: The third circle of usability. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, CSCL'11, (pp. 510–517). Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2010). Technology for classroom orchestration. In M. S. Khine & I. M. Saleh (Eds.), New science of learning (pp. 525–552). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dimitriadis, Y. A. (2012). Supporting Teachers in Orchestrating CSCL Classrooms. In A. Jimoyiannis (Ed.), Research on e-Learning and ICT in Education (pp. 71–82). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Do-Lenh, Son. (2012). Supporting Reflection and Classroom Orchestration with Tangible Tabletops. Doctoral dissertation. École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland: CRAFT group, School of Computer Science.Google Scholar
  26. Echeverria, V., Martinez-Maldonado, R., & Shum, S. B.. (2019). Towards Collaboration Translucence: Giving Meaning to Multimodal Group Data. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI'19, (pp. 39, 31–16). ACM.Google Scholar
  27. Echeverria, V., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Shum, S. B., Chiluiza, K., Granda, R., & Conati, C. (2018). Exploratory versus Explanatory Visual Learning Analytics: Driving Teachers’ Attention through Educational Data Storytelling. Journal of Learning Analytics, 5(3), 72–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Erickson, T., & Kellogg, W. A. (2000). Social translucence: an approach to designing systems that support social processes. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7(1), 59–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Mandl, H., & Haake, J. M. (2007). Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives (Vol. 6). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Greller, W., & Drachsler, H. (2012). Translating learning into numbers: A generic framework for learning analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 42–57.Google Scholar
  31. Gutiérrez Rojas, I., Crespo García, R. M., & Kloos, C. D. (2012). Enhancing Orchestration of Lab Sessions by Means of Awareness Mechanisms. In A. Ravenscroft, S. Lindstaedt, C. Kloos, & D. Hernández-Leo (Eds.), 21st Century Learning for 21st Century Skills (pp. 113–125). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gweon, Gahgene, Carolyn P. Rosé, Emil Albright, and Yue Cui. (2007). Evaluating the effect of feedback from a CSCL problem solving environment on learning, interaction, and perceived interdependence. In Proceedings of 8th iternational conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, (pp. 234–243). ISLS.Google Scholar
  33. Hämäläinen, R., & Arvaja, M. (2009). Scripted collaboration and group-based variations in a Higher Education CSCL context. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hernández-Leo, D., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Pardo, A., Muñoz-Cristóbal, J. A., & Rodríguez-Triana, M. J. (2019). Analytics for learning design: A layered framework and tools. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 139–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Higgins, S., Mercier, E., Burd, E., & Hatch, A. (2011). Multi-touch tables and the relationship with collaborative classroom pedagogies: A synthetic review. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4), 515–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Holstein, Kenneth, Bruce M. McLaren, and Aleven, V. (2018). The Classrooom as a Dashboard: Co-designing Wearable Cognitive Augmentation for K-12 Teachers. In Proceedings of International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, LAK'18, (pp. 79–88). ACM.Google Scholar
  38. Kaendler, C., Wiedmann, M., Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2015). Teacher Competencies for the Implementation of Collaborative Learning in the Classroom: a Framework and Research Review. Educational Psychology Review, 27(3), 505–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kamin, S., Capitanu, B., Twidale, M., & Peiper, C. (2009). A teacher’s dashboard for a high school algebra class. In R. H. Reed, D. A. Berque, & J. C. Prey (Eds.), The impact of tablet PCs and pen-based technology on education: Evidence and outcomes (pp. 63–72). West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Can we support CSCL? Educational, social and technological affordances for learning. Google Scholar
  41. Knaflic, C. N. (2015). Storytelling with data: A data visualization guide for business professionals. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kreitmayer, Stefan, Yvonne Rogers, Robin Laney, and Stephen Peake. (2013). UniPad: orchestrating collaborative activities through shared tablets and an integrated wall display. In Proceedings of 2013 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UBICOMP 2013), (pp. 801–810). ACM.Google Scholar
  43. Liu, A. L., & Nesbit, J. C. (2019). Dashboards for Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. In M. Virvou, E. Alepis, G. A. Tsihrintzis, & L. C. Jain (Eds.), Machine Learning Paradigms: Advances in Learning Analytics (pp. 157–182). Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  44. Liu, A. L., & Nesbit, J. C. (2020). Dashboards for Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. In M. Virvou, E. Alepis, G. A. Tsihrintzis, & L. C. Jain (Eds.), Machine Learning Paradigms: Advances in Learning Analytics (pp. 157–182). Cham: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Loibl, K., & Rummel, N. (2014). The impact of guidance during problem-solving prior to instruction on students’ inventions and learning outcomes. Instructional Science, 42(3), 305–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Looi, C.-K., & Song, Y. (2013). Orchestration in a networked classroom: Where the teacher's real-time enactment matters. Computers & Education, 69, 510–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ludvigsen, S., Cress, U., Law, N., Rosé, C. P., & Stahl, G. (2016). Collaboration scripts and scaffolding. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(4), 381–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mangaroska, K., & Giannakos, M. N. (2018). Learning analytics for learning design: A systematic literature review of analytics-driven design to enhance learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, (in press), 1–19.Google Scholar
  49. Martinez-Maldonado, R., Clayphan, A., & Kay, J. (2015a). Deploying and Visualising Teacher’s Scripts of Small Group Activities in a Multi-Surface Classroom Ecology: a study in-the-wild. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 24(2), 177–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Martinez-Maldonado, R., Clayphan, A., Yacef, K., & Kay, J. (2015b). MTFeedback: providing notifications to enhance teacher awareness of small group work in the classroom. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 8(2), 187–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Martinez-Maldonado, Roberto, Yannis Dimitriadis, Judy Kay, Kalina Yacef, and Marie-Theresa Edbauer. (2013). MTClassroom and MTDashboard: supporting analysis of teacher attention in an orchestrated multi-tabletop classroom. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL2013), (pp. 119–128). ISLS.Google Scholar
  52. Martinez-Maldonado, Roberto, Judy Kay, and Kalina Yacef. (2011a). Visualisations for longitudinal participation, contribution and progress of a collaborative task at the tabletop. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Supported Learning, CSCL'11, (pp. 25–32). ISLS.Google Scholar
  53. Martinez-Maldonado, R., Schneider, B., Charleer, S., Shum, S. B., Klerkx, J., & Duval, E. (2016). Interactive Surfaces and Learning Analytics: Data, Orchestration Aspects, Pedagogical Uses and Challenges. In Proceedings of Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 124–133 ). ACM.Google Scholar
  54. Martinez-Maldonado, Roberto, Kalina Yacef, Judy Kay, Ahmed Kharrufa, and Ammar Al-Qaraghuli. (2011b). Analysing frequent sequential patterns of collaborative learning activity around an interactive tabletop. In Proceedings of International Conference on Educational Data Mining 2011 (EDM 2011), (pp. 111–120).Google Scholar
  55. Martinez-Maldonado, R, Yacef, K., Kay, J., & Schwendimann, B. (2012). An interactive teacher’s dashboard for monitoring multiple groups in a multi-tabletop learning environment. In Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems 2012 (ITS 2012), (pp. 482–492). Springer.Google Scholar
  56. Mercier, E. (2016). Teacher orchestration and student learning during mathematics activities in a smart classroom. International Journal of Smart Technology and Learning, 1(1), 33–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Molenaar, I., & Carolien Knoop-van Campen. (2017). Teacher dashboards in practice: Usage and impact. In Proceedings of European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, (pp. 125–138). Springer.Google Scholar
  58. Munoz-Cristobal, J. A., Jorrin-Abellan, I. M., Asensio-Perez, J. I., Martinez-Mones, A., Prieto, L. P., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2015). Supporting teacher orchestration in ubiquitous learning environments: a study in primary education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 8(1), 83–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Muñoz-Cristóbal, J. A., Prieto, L. P., Asensio-Pérez, J. I., Martínez-Monés, A., Jorrín-Abellán, I. M., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2014). Deploying learning designs across physical and web spaces: Making pervasive learning affordable for teachers. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 14, 31–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Ni, A. Y. (2013). Comparing the effectiveness of classroom and online learning: Teaching research methods. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 19(2), 199–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nicolopoulou, A., & Cole, M. (1996). Generation and transmission of shared knowledge in the culture of collaborative learning: The Fifth Dimension, its play-world and its institutional contexts. In E. Forman, N. Minnick, & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children's development (pp. 283–314). New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  62. Noel, R., Riquelme, F., Lean, R. M., Merino, E., Cechinel, C., Barcelos, T. S., Villarroel, R., & Munoz, R. (2018). Exploring Collaborative Writing of User Stories With Multimodal Learning Analytics: A Case Study on a Software Engineering Course. IEEE Access, 6, 67783–67798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Noguera, I., Guerrero-Roldán, A.-E., & Masó, R. (2018). Collaborative agile learning in online environments: Strategies for improving team regulation and project management. Computers in Education, 116, 110–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. O’Donnell, A. M., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2013). Introduction: What is collaborative learning? An overview. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. M. O'Donnell (Eds.), The International Handbook of Collaborative Learning (pp. 1–15). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  65. Olsen, J. (2017). Orchestrating Combined Collaborative and Individual Learning in the Classroom. Doctoral dissertation. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Human-Computer Interaction Institute.Google Scholar
  66. Peiper, C. E. (2008). A teacher's dashboard: Monitoring students in Tablet PC classroom settings. Doctoral dissertation. University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  67. Phiri, L., Meinel, C., & Suleman, H. (2016). Streamlined orchestration: An orchestration workbench framework for effective teaching. Computers & Education, 95, 231–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Prieto, L. P., Dimitriadis, Y., Asensio-Pérez, J. I., & Looi, C.-K. (2015a). Orchestration in learning technology research: evaluation of a conceptual framework. Research in Learning Technology, 23, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Prieto, L. P, Dimitriadis, Y, Harrer, A, Milrad, M., Nussbaum, M, & Slotta, J. D. (2015b). The orchestrated collaborative classroom: Designing and making sense of heterogeneous ecologies of teaching and learning resources. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 880–884). International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  70. Prieto, L. P., Triana, M. J. R., Maldonado, R. M., Dimitriadis, Y. A., & Gašević, D. (2018). Orchestrating learning analytics (OrLA): Supporting inter-stakeholder communication about adoption of learning analytics at the classroom level. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 14–33.Google Scholar
  71. Prieto, L. P., Sharma, K., Kidzinski, L., & Dillenbourg, P. (2017). Orchestration Load Indicators and Patterns: In-the-wild Studies Using Mobile Eye-tracking. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 11(2), 1–1.Google Scholar
  72. Prieto, L. P., Sharma, K., & Dillenbourg, P. (2015c). Studying Teacher Orchestration Load in Technology-Enhanced Classrooms. In G. Conole, T. Klobučar, C. Rensing, J. Konert, & É. Lavoué (Eds.), Design for Teaching and Learning in a Networked World (pp. 268–281). International Publishing: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Prinsen, F., Volman, M. L. L., & Terwel, J. (2007). The influence of learner characteristics on degree and type of participation in a CSCL environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(6), 1037–1055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rodríguez-Triana, M. J., Prieto, L. P., Martínez-Monés, A., Asensio-Pérez, J. I., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2018). Monitoring Collaborative Learning Activities: Exploring the Differential Value of Collaborative Flow Patterns for Learning Analytics. In Proceedings of 2018 IEEE 18th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, ICALT'18, (pp. 155–159). IEEE.Google Scholar
  75. Rodríguez Triana, Jesús, M., Monés, A. M., Asensio Pérez, J. I., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2014). Scripting and monitoring meet each other: Aligning learning analytics and learning design to support teachers in orchestrating CSCL situations. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 330–343.Google Scholar
  76. Scheffel, M., Drachsler, H., Stoyanov, S., & Specht, M. (2014). Quality indicators for learning analytics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 117.Google Scholar
  77. Schell, J., Lukoff, B., & Mazur, E. (2013). Catalyzing learner engagement using cutting-edge classroom response systems in higher education. Cutting-edge Technologies in Higher Education, E(6), 233–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Schwendimann, B. A., Rodriguez-Triana, M. J., Vozniuk, A., Prieto, L. P., Boroujeni, M. S., Holzer, A., Gillet, D., & Dillenbourg, P. (2017). Perceiving learning at a glance: A systematic literature review of learning dashboard research. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 10(1), 30–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Sirbu, Maria-Dorinela, Mihai Dascalu, Scott A Crossley, Danielle S McNamara, and Stefan Trausan-Matu. (2019). Longitudinal Analysis and Visualization of Participation in Online Courses Powered by Cohesion Network Analysis. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, (pp. 640–643).Google Scholar
  80. Slade, S., & Prinsloo, P. (2013). Learning Analytics: Ethical Issues and Dilemmas. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1510–1529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Soller, A., Martinez, A., Jermann, P., & Muehlenbrock, M. (2005). From Mirroring to Guiding: A Review of State of the Art Technology for Supporting Collaborative Learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15(4), 261–290.Google Scholar
  82. Sottilare, R. A., Shawn Burke, C., Salas, E., Sinatra, A. M., Johnston, J. H., & Gilbert, S. B. (2018). Designing adaptive instruction for teams: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 28(2), 225–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Spence, R. (2001). Information visualization (Vol. 1). New York: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  84. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Oxford, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  85. Stahl, Gerry. (2002). Rediscovering cscl. Paper presented at the CSCL, (pp. 169-181).Google Scholar
  86. Stahl, G. (2015). A decade of CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(4), 337–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Stahl, G. (2017). Global introduction to CSCL. Philadelphia: Lulu.Google Scholar
  88. Stodel, E. J., Thompson, T. L., & MacDonald, C. J. (2006). Learners' perspectives on what is missing from online learning: Interpretations through the community of inquiry framework. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 7(3).Google Scholar
  89. Tchounikine, P. (2013). Clarifying design for orchestration: orchestration and orchestrable technology, scripting and conducting. Computers & Education, 69, 500–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Tchounikine, P. (2019). Learners’ agency and CSCL technologies: towards an emancipatory perspective. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 14(2), 237–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Teasley, S. D. (2017). Student Facing Dashboards: One Size Fits All? Technology. Knowledge and Learning, 22(3), 377–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Tissenbaum, Mike, Camillia Matuk, Matthew Berland, Felipe Cocco, Marcia Linn, CREATE Nik Hajny, CREATE Al Olsen, Beat Schwendimann, Mina Shirvani Boroujeni, and Jonathan Vitale. (2016). Real-time visualization of student activities to support classroom orchestration. In Proceedings of 12th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, (pp. 1120–1127). ISLSs.Google Scholar
  93. Treisman, A. (1985). Preattentive processing in vision. Computer vision, graphics, and image processing, 31(2), 156–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. van Leeuwen, A. (2015). Learning analytics to support teachers during synchronous CSCL: Balancing between overview and overload. Journal of learning Analytics, 2(2), 138–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Van Leeuwen, Anouschka, J. J., Erkens, G., & Brekelmans, M. (2014). Supporting teachers in guiding collaborating students: Effects of learning analytics in CSCL. Computers in Education, 79, 28–39.Google Scholar
  96. van Leeuwen, A., Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Brekelmans, M. (2015). Teacher regulation of multiple computer-supported collaborating groups. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 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, (in press), 1–29.Google Scholar
  98. VanLehn, Kurt, Salman Cheema, Jon Wetzel, and Daniel Pead. (2016). Some less obvious features of classroom orchestration systems Educational Technologies: Challenges, Applications and Learning Outcomes, (pp. 73–94). Nova Science Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  99. Verbert, K., Duval, E., Klerkx, J., Govaerts, S., & Santos, J. L. (2013). Learning Analytics Dashboard Applications. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1500–1509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Walton, Jamiahus, Michael C Dorneich, Stephen Gilbert, Desmond Bonner, Eliot Winer, and Colin Ray. (2014). Modality and timing of team feedback: Implications for GIFT. Paper presented at the 2nd Annual GIFT Users Symposium, (pp. 199–207).Google Scholar
  101. Wang, Patrick, Pierre Tchounikine, and Matthieu Quignard. (2015). A Model to Support Monitoring for Classroom Orchestration in a Tablet-Based CSCL Activity. In Proceedings of 10th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, (pp. 491–496). Springer.Google Scholar
  102. Wise, A., Knight, S., & Shum, S. B. (2020). Collaborative Learning Analytics. In U. Cress, C. Rosé, A. Wise, & J. Oshima (Eds.), International Handbook of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, (pp. in press. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  103. Wise, A. F., & Schwarz, B. B. (2017). Visions of CSCL: eight provocations for the future of the field. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 12(4), 423–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Xing, Wanli, Bob Wadholm, and Sean Goggins. (2014). Learning analytics in CSCL with a focus on assessment: an exploratory study of activity theory-informed cluster analysis. In Proceedings of International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, LAK'14, (pp. 59–67). ACM.Google Scholar
  105. Yi, Ji Soo, Youn-ah Kang, John T. Stasko, and Julie A. Jacko. (2008). Understanding and characterizing insights: how do people gain insights using information visualization? In Proceedings of 2008 Workshop on Beyond time and errors: novel evaLuation methods for Information Visualization, (pp. 1–6). ACM.Google Scholar
  106. Yoo, Yesom, Hyeyun Lee, Il-Hyun Jo, and Yeonjeong Park. (2015). Educational Dashboards for Smart Learning: Review of Case Studies. In Proceedings of Emerging Issues in Smart Learning, (pp. 145–155). Springer.Google Scholar
  107. Zurita, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2004). Computer supported collaborative learning using wirelessly interconnected handheld computers. Computers & Education, 42(3), 289–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc. 2019
corrected publication 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Information TechnologiesMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations