Advertisement

Digital Applications as Smart Solutions for Learning and Teaching at Higher Education Institutions

  • Luisa Seiler
  • Matthias Kuhnel
  • Dirk IfenthalerEmail author
  • Andrea Honal
Chapter

Abstract

Mobile learning analytics are an effective opportunity to optimize the learning and teaching processes in higher education—not only for students but also for lecturers and the educational institutions. The usage of learning analytics and a combination of this approach with mobile devices like tablets and smartphones in particular are relatively new to the German research communities. Thus, a collaborative research project of the Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University Mannheim and the University of Mannheim explores the short-term and long-term effects, risks, and benefits of the usage of mobile learning analytics in students’ daily life. Using a web app, personal and learning data of students are collected, tracked, and visualized. Besides the fact that the individual learning tracking is very helpful for the students, the lecturers also receive selected information about their students in an anonymous format on a dashboard. For each course, the lecturers obtain specific data about motivation and learning performance of their students. Moreover, students can evaluate the teaching units in real time and give feedback in an anonymous way to their lecturers. The information can be used to adapt the teaching content to the students’ needs and to offer a more personalized learning process for students. Additionally, the teacher-student communication can be enhanced, too. The research project contributes to the growing evidence of learning analytics in Germany and shows how technological approaches can improve the higher education processes for all involved academic stakeholders.

Keywords

Mobile learning analytics Higher education Adaptive support Mobile devices Web technologies 

References

  1. Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., Freeman, A., Hall Giesinger, C., & Ananthanarayanan, V. (2017). NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2017-nmc-horizon-report-he-EN.pdf Google Scholar
  2. Aguilar, J., Valdiviezo, P., Cordero, J., & Sánchez, M. (2015). Conceptual design of smart classroom based on multiagent systems. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ICAI’15), USA. Google Scholar
  3. Berland, M., Baker, R. S., & Blikstein, P. (2014). Educational data mining and learning analytics: Applications to constructionist research. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 19, 205–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ebner, M., Taraghi, B., Saranti, A., & Schön, S. (2015). From the field. Seven features of smart learning analytics – lessons learned from four years of research with learning analytics. eLearning Papers no. 40, 2. Retrieved from https://www.openeducationeuropa.eu/sites/default/files/asset/Assessment%20certification%20and%20quality%20assurance%20in%20open%20learning_From-field_40_3.pdf
  5. Elias, T. (2011). Learning analytics: Definitions, processes and potential. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.456.7092&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  6. Ferguson, R. (2012). Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5/6), 304–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gibson, D. C., & Ifenthaler, D. (2017). Preparing the next generation of education researchers for big data in higher education. In B. Kei Daniel (Ed.), Big data and learning analytics: Current theory and practice in higher education (pp. 29–42). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gikas, J., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Mobile computing devices in higher education: Student perspectives on learning with cellphones, smartphones & social media. Internet and Higher Education, 19, 18–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gosper, M., & Ifenthaler, D. (2014). Curriculum design for the twenty-first Century. In M. Gosper & D. Ifenthaler (Eds.), Curriculum models for the 21st century. Using learning technologies in higher education (pp. 1–15). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gourova, E., Asenova, A., & Dulev, P. (2015). Integrated platform for mobile learning. In D. G. Sampson, P. Isaias, D. Ifenthaler, & J. M. Spector (Eds.), Ubiquitous and mobile learning in the digital age (pp. 67–92). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Graf, S., Kinshuk, C., & Ives, A. (2010). A flexible mechanism for providing additivity based on learning styles in learning management systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2010), Sousse/Tunisia. Google Scholar
  12. Griffin, P., & Care, E. (2015). Assessment and teaching of 21st Century skills: Methods and approach. Dordrecht, NL: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Hwang, G. J. (2014). Definition, framework and research issues of smart learning environments – a context-aware ubiquitous learning perspective. Smart Learning environments – A Springer Open Journal. Retrieved from https://slejournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40561-014-0004-5
  14. Ifenthaler, D. (2015). Learning analytics. In J. M. Spector (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of educational technology (Vol. 2, pp. 447–451). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Ifenthaler, D. (2017a). Are higher education institutions prepared for learning analytics? TechTrends, 61(4), 366–371.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0154-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ifenthaler, D. (2017b). Learning analytics design. In L. Lin & J. M. Spector (Eds.), The sciences of learning and instructional design. Constructive articulation between communities (pp. 202–211). New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ifenthaler, D., & Drachsler, H. (2018). Learning analytics. In H. M. Niegemann & A. Weinberger (Eds.), Lernen mit Bildungstechnologien. Heiedelberg, Germany: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Ifenthaler, D., & Schumacher, C. (2016). Student perceptions of privacy principles for learning analytics. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(5), 923–938.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9477-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ifenthaler, D., & Widanapathirana, C. (2014). Development and validation of a learning analytics framework: Two case studies using support vector machines. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 19(1–2), 221–240.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-014-9226-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keeley, L., Pikkel, R., Quinn, B., & Walters, H. (2013). Ten types of innovation: The discipline of building breakthroughs. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  21. Koper, R. (2014). Conditions for effective smart learning environments. Smart Learning Environments – A Springer Open Journal. Retrieved from https://slejournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40561-014-0005-4
  22. Kuhnel, M., Seiler, L., Honal, A., & Ifenthaler, D. (2017). Mobile learning analytics in higher education – Usability testing and evaluation of an app prototype. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age (CELDA 2017), Vilamoura/Algarve (Portugal).Google Scholar
  23. Laurillard, D. (2008). Technology enhanced learning as a tool for pedagogical innovation. Philosophy of Education, 42(3–4), 521–533.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.2008.00658.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lockyer, L., Heathcote, E., & Dawson, S. (2013). Informing pedagogical action: Aligning learning analytics with learning design. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1439–1459.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213479367 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mac Callum, K., Jeffrey, L., & Kinshuk, N. A. (2014). Factors impacting teachers’ adoption of mobile learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13, 141–162. Retrieved from http://www.jite.org/documents/Vol13/JITEv13ResearchP141-162MacCallum0455.pdf CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. MacCarthy, M. (2014). Student privacy. Harm and context. IRIE – International Review of Information Ethics, 21, 11–24.Google Scholar
  27. Macfadyen, L., & Dawson, S. (2012). Numbers are not enough. Why e-Learning analytics failed to inform an institutional strategic plan. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 149–163.Google Scholar
  28. Macfadyen, L., Dawson, S., Pardo, A., & Gašević, D. (2014). Embracing big data in complex educational systems: The learning analytics imperative and the policy challenge. Research & Practice in Assessment, 9, 17–28. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1062692.pdf Google Scholar
  29. McQuiggan, S., Kosturko, L., McQuiggan, J., & Sabourin, J. (2015). Changing education with mobile learning. In S. McQuiggan, L. Kosturko, J. McQuiggan, & J. Sabourin (Eds.), Mobile learning: A handbook for developers, educators and learners (pp. 1–21). Hoboken: NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  30. Mor, Y., Ferguson, R., & Wasson, B. (2015). Editorial: Learning design, teacher inquiry into student learning and learning analytics: A call for action. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 221–229.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12273 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Parment, A. (2013). Die Generation Y: Mitarbeiter der Zukunft motivieren, integrieren, führen (2. Aufl.). Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer Gabler. [The Generation Y: Motivating, integrating, leading employees of the future].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pimmer, C., Mateescu, M., & Gröhbiel, U. (2016). Mobile and ubiquitous learning in higher education settings. A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 490–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pirnay-Dummer, P., Ifenthaler, D., & Spector, J. M. (2010). Highly integrated model assessment technology and tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, Springer, 58, 3–18.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9119-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Postareff, L., Mattsson, M., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., & Hailikari, T. (2016). The complex relationship between emotions, approaches to learning, study success and study progress during the transition to university. Higher Education, 73(3), 441–457.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0096-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sampson, D. G., & Zervas, P. (2013). Learning object repositories as knowledge management Systems. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 5(2), 116–136.Google Scholar
  36. Scanlon, E., Sharples, M., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Fleck, J., Cooban, C., Ferguson, R., … Waterhouse, P. (2013). Beyond prototypes: Enabling innovation in technology-enhanced learning. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/41119/1/BeyondPrototypes.pdf Google Scholar
  37. Schumacher, C., & Ifenthaler, D. (2018). Features students really expect from learning analytics. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 397–407.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.06.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sharples, M. (2013). Mobile learning: research, practice and challenges. Distance Education in China, 3(5), 5–11. Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/37510/2/sharples.pdf Google Scholar
  39. Smart. (n.d.). In Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved from https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/smart
  40. Spector, M. (2014). Conceptualizing the emerging field of smart learning environments. Smart Learning Environments – A Springer Open Journal. Retrieved from https://slejournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40561-014-0002-7
  41. Tempelaar, D. (2017). How dispositional learning analytics helps understanding the worked-example principle. In D. G. Sampson, J. M. Spector, D. Ifenthaler, & P. Isaías (Eds.), Proceedings 14th International Conference on Cognition and Exploratory Learning in Digital Age (CELDA 2017) (pp. 117–124). Mannheim, Germany: IADIS Press.Google Scholar
  42. Torres, J. C., Infante, A., & Torres, P. V. (2015). Mobile learning: perspectives. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal, 12(1), 38–49.  https://doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v12i1.1944 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Traxler, J. (2009). Current state of mobile learning). In M. Ally (Ed.), Mobile learning: Transforming the delivery of education and training (pp. 9–24). Edmonton, Canada: Athabasca University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Verbert, K., Manouselis, N., Drachsler, H., & Duval, E. (2012). Dataset-driven research to support learning and knowledge analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 133–148. Retrieved from http://www.ifets.info/journals/15_3/10.pdf Google Scholar
  45. Vrieling, E., Stijnen, S., & Bastiaens, T. (2017). Successful learning: balancing self-regulation with instructional planning. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(6), 1–16.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2017.1414784 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. West, D. M. (2015). Digital divide: Improving Internet access in the developing world through affordable services and diverse content. In Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/West_Internet-Access.pdf
  47. Young, J., & Mendizabal, E. (2009). Helping researchers become policy enterpreneurs: How to develop engagement strategies for evidence-based policy-making. London: Overseas Development Institute.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luisa Seiler
    • 1
  • Matthias Kuhnel
    • 2
  • Dirk Ifenthaler
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Andrea Honal
    • 1
  1. 1.Cooperative State University MannheimMannheimGermany
  2. 2.University of MannheimMannheimGermany
  3. 3.Curtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations