“Keep Your Eyes on ’em all!”: A Mobile Eye-Tracking Analysis of Teachers’ Sensitivity to Students

  • Philippe Dessus
  • Olivier Cosnefroy
  • Vanda Luengo
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9891)


This study aims at investigating which cues teachers detect and process from their students during instruction. This information capturing process depends on teachers’ sensitivity, or awareness, to students’ needs, which has been recognized as crucial for classroom management. We recorded the gaze behaviors of two pre-service teachers and two experienced teachers during a whole math lesson in primary classrooms. Thanks to a simple Learning Analytics interface, the data analysis reports, firstly, which were the most often tracked students, in relation with their classroom behavior and performance; secondly, which relationships exist between teachers’ attentional frequency distribution and lability, and the overall classroom climate they promote, measured by the Classroom Assessment Scoring System. Results show that participants’ gaze patterns are mainly related to their experience. Learning Analytics use cases are eventually presented, enabling researchers or teacher trainers to further explore the eye-tracking data.


Mobile eye-tracking Learning analytics Classroom supervision Teacher information taking Classroom observation system Visualization techniques 



This research was partly funded by the Pôle Grenoble Cognition, Univ. Grenoble Alpes, France. This research was approved by the CERNI (University’s local ethical committee, n° 2013-09-24-25). We would like to thank the four teachers for having accepted to wear so weird a device and nevertheless doing good teaching; Brigitte Meillon for her invaluable help in calibrating, capturing, and post-producing the video footages; Michèle Arnoux and Mathieu Louvart for CLASS and videos’ coding; Luc Sindirian and Pascal Bilau for making this research possible; and Andrea Doos for checking the English of a previous version of this paper.


  1. 1.
    Rittenbruch, M., McEwan, G.: An historical reflection of awareness in collaboration. In: Markopoulos, P., Mackay, W., de Ruyter, B. (eds.) Awareness Systems: Advances in Theory, Methodology and Design, pp. 3–48. Springer, London (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pianta, R.C., La Paro, K.M., Hamre, B.K.: Classroom Assessment Scoring System: Manual K-3. Brookes, Baltimore (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kounin, J.S.: Discipline and Group Management in Classrooms. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York (1970)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lundgren, U.P.: Frame Factors and the Teaching Process. Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm (1972)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hastie, P.A., Sinelnikov, O.A., Brock, S.J., Sharpe, T.L., Eiler, K., Mowling, C.: Kounin revisited: tentative postulates for an expanded examination of classroom ecologies. J. Teach. Phys. Educ. 26, 298–309 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Irving, O., Martin, J.: Withitness: the confusing variable. Am. Educ. Res. J. 19(2), 313–319 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wanlin, P.: Elèves forts ou faibles: qui donne le tempo? Université de Liège, Liège (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ericsson, K.A., Simon, H.A.: Verbal reports as data. Psychol. Rev. 87, 215–251 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Salvucci, D.D., Anderson, J.R.: Automated eye-movement protocol analysis. Hum. Comput. Interact. 16, 39–86 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mele, M.L., Federici, S.: A psychotechnological review on eye-tracking systems: towards user experience. Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol. 7(4), 261–281 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yang, F.-Y., Chang, C.-Y., Chien, W.-R., Chien, Y.-T., Tseng, Y.-H.: Tracking learners’ visual attention during a multimedia presentation in a real classroom. Comput. Educ. 62, 208–220 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Prieto, L.P., Sharma, K., Wen, Y., Dillenbourg, P.: The burden of facilitating collaboration: towards estimation of teacher orchestration load using eye-tracking measures. In: 11th International Conference on CSCL 2015, vol. 1, pp. 212–219. ISLS, Gothenburg (2015)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wolff, C., Van den Bogert, N., Jarodzka, H., Boshuizen, H.P.A.: Differences between experienced and student teachers’ perceptions and interpretations of classroom management events. In: Inter-University Center for Educational Sciences Fall School, Girona, Spain (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    van den Bogert, N., van Bruggen, J., Kostons, D., Jochems, W.M.G.: First steps into understanding teachers’ visual perception of classroom events. Teaching Teach. Educ. 37, 208–216 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cortina, K.S., Miller, K.F., McKenzie, R., Epstein, A.: Where low and high inference data converge: validation of CLASS assessment of mathematics instruction using mobile eye tracking with expert and novice teachers. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 13(2), 389–403 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Doyle, W.: Classroom organization and management. In: Wittrock, M.C. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching, pp. 392–431. McMillan, New York (1986)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gettinger, M., Kohler, K.M.: Process-outcome approaches to classroom management and effective teaching. In: Evertson, C.M., Weinstein, C.S. (eds.) Handbook of Classroom Management: Research, Practice, and Contemporary Issues, pp. 73–96. Erlbaum, Mahwah (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guimard, P., Cosnefroy, O., Florin, A.: Evaluation des comportements et des compétences scolaires par les enseignants et prédiction des performances et des parcours à l’école élémentaire et au collège. Orientation Scolaire et Professionnelle 36(2), 179–202 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hora, M.T., Oleson, A., Ferrare, J.J.: Teaching Dimensions Observation Protocol (TDOP) User’s Manual. Wisconsin Center for Education Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison (2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sloetjes, H., Wittenburg, P.: Annotation by category – ELAN and ISO DCR. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008). ELRA, Marrakech (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bouhineau, D., Lalle, S., Luengo, V., Mandran, N., Ortega, M., Wajeman, C.: Share data treatment and analysis processes in technology enhanced learning. In: Data Analysis and Interpretation for Learning Environments Workshop, Held in Conjunction with the Alpine Rendez-Vous ‘2013, Villard-de-Lans, France (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vatrapu, R., Reimann, P., Halb, W., Bull, S.: Second international workshop on teaching analytics. In: Proceedings of Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (LAK 2013), pp. 287–289. ACM, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hattie, J.: Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hogan, T., Rabinowitz, M., Craven, J.A.: Representation in teaching: inferences from research of expert and novice teachers. Educ. Psychol. 38(4), 235–247 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Doyle, W.: Making managerial decisions in classrooms. In: Luke, D.L. (ed.) Classroom Management, pp. 42–74. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1979)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ward, P., Williams, M., Hancock, P.A.: Simulation for performance and training. In: Ericsson, K.A., Charness, N., Feltovich, P.J., Hoffman, R.R. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance, pp. 243–262. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Holmqvist, K., Nyström, M., Andersson, R., Dewhurst, R., Jarodzka, H., van de Weijer, J.: Eye Tracking: A Comprehensive Guide to Methods and Measures. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philippe Dessus
    • 1
  • Olivier Cosnefroy
    • 1
    • 2
  • Vanda Luengo
    • 3
  1. 1.Univ. Grenoble Alpes, LSE (EA 602)GrenobleFrance
  2. 2.DEPP, French Ministry of EducationParisFrance
  3. 3.Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, LIP6 (UMR CNRS 7606)ParisFrance

Personalised recommendations