Skip to main content

Educational Theories and Learning Analytics: From Data to Knowledge

The Whole Is Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts

Abstract

The study of learning is grounded in theories and research. Since learning is complex and not directly observable, it is often inferred by collecting and analysing data based on the things learners do or say. By virtue, theories are developed from the analyses of data collected. With the proliferation of technology, large amounts of data are generated when students learn online. Therefore, researchers not only have data on students’ learning performance, but they also have data on the actions students take to achieve the desired learning outcomes. These data could help researchers to understand how students learn and the conditions needed for successful learning. In turn, the information can be translated to instructional and learning design to support students. The aim of the chapter is to discuss how learning theories and learning analytics are important components of educational research. To achieve this aim, studies employing learning analytics are qualitatively reviewed to examine which theories have been used and how the theories have been investigated. The results of the review show that self-regulated learning, motivation, and social constructivism theories were used in studies employing learning analytics. However, the studies at present are mostly correlational. Therefore, experimental studies are needed to examine how theory-informed practices can be implemented so that students can be better supported in online learning environments. The chapter concludes by proposing an iterative loop for educational research employing learning analytics in which learning theories guide data collection and analyses. To convert data into knowledge, it is important to recognize what we already know and what we want to examine.

Keywords

  • Learning theories
  • Big data
  • Learning analytics
  • Study success

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-64792-0_1
  • Chapter length: 23 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-319-64792-0
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1.1

References

  • Alexander, P. A. (2006). Evolution of a learning theory: A case study. Educational Psychologist, 41(4), 257–264.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. L., & Reynolds, R. E. (2009). What is learning anyway? A topographical perspective considered. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 176–192.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25(4), 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atif, A., Bilgin, A., & Richards, D. (2015). Student preferences and attitudes to the use of early alerts. In Paper Presented at the Twenty-first Americas Conference on Information Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ausubel, D. P. (1969). A cognitive theory of school learning. Psychology in the Schools, 6(4), 331–335.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Barba, P. D., Kennedy, G. E., & Ainley, M. D. (2016). The role of students’ motivation and participation in predicting performance in a MOOC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(3), 218–231.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bos, N., & Brand-Gruwel, S. (2016). Student differences in regulation strategies and their use of learning resources: Implications for educational design. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (pp. 344–353).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, C., Erickson, G., Greer, J., & Gutwin, C. (2014). Modelling and quantifying the behaviours of students in lecture capture environments. Computers & Education, 75, 282–292.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245–281.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, A. S., & Hundhausen, C. D. (2016) With a little help from my friends: An empirical study of the interplay of students’ social activities, programming activities, and course success. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 201–209).

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, A. S., Hundhausen, C. D., & Adesope, O. (2015). The normalized programming state model: Predicting student performance in computing courses based on programming behavior. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual International Conference on International Computing Education Research (pp. 141–150).

    Google Scholar 

  • Clayson, D. E. (2009). Student evaluations of teaching: Are they related to what students learn? A meta-analysis and review of the literature. Journal of Marketing Education, 31(1), 16–30.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Credé, M., Roch, S. G., & Kieszczynka, U. M. (2010). Class attendance in college: A meta-analytic review of the relationship of class attendance with grades and student characteristics. Review of Educational Research, 80(2), 272–295.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, S., Gašević, D., Siemens, G., & Joksimovic, S. (2014). Current state and future trends: A citation network analysis of the learning analytics field. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge (pp. 231–240).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., & Rawson, K. A. (2015). Practice tests, spaced practice, and successive relearning: Tips for classroom use and for guiding students’ learning. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(1), 72.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50–72.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, R. (2012). Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5–6), 304–317.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gašević, D., Dawson, S., & Siemens, G. (2015). Let’s not forget: Learning analytics are about learning. TechTrends, 59(1), 64–71.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gikandi, J. W., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. E. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2333–2351.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Greller, W., & Drachsler, H. (2012). Translating learning into numbers: A generic framework for learning analytics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 42–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadwin, A. F., Nesbit, J. C., Jamieson-Noel, D., Code, J., & Winne, P. H. (2007). Examining trace data to explore self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 2(2–3), 107–124.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ifenthaler, D. (2017). Learning analytics design. In L. Lin & M. Spector (Eds.), The sciences of learning and instructional design: Constructive articulation between communities (pp. 202–211). New York, NY: Routledge.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Joksimović, S., Gašević, D., Loughin, T. M., Kovanović, V., & Hatala, M. (2015). Learning at distance: Effects of interaction traces on academic achievement. Computers & Education, 87, 204–217.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Jovanović, J., Gašević, D., Dawson, S., Pardo, A., & Mirriahi, N. (2017). Learning analytics to unveil learning strategies in a flipped classroom. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 74–85.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Junco, R., & Clem, C. (2015). Predicting course outcomes with digital textbook usage data. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 54–63.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, D., Park, Y., Yoon, M., & Jo, I. H. (2016). Toward evidence-based learning analytics: Using proxy variables to improve asynchronous online discussion environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 30, 30–43.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K., & Moon, N. (2017). A model for collecting and analyzing action data in a learning process based on activity theory. Soft Computing, 22, 6671–6681.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kizilcec, R. F., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., & Maldonado, J. J. (2017). Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in Massive Open Online Courses. Computers & Education, 104, 18–33.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, S., & Buckingham Shum, S. (2017). Theory and learning analytics. In C. Lang, G. Siemens, A. F. Wise, & D. Gašević (Eds.), The handbook of learning analytics (pp. 17–22). Alberta, Canada: Society for Learning Analytics Research (SoLAR).

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S., & d’Aquin, M. (2017). Unsupervised learning for understanding student achievement in a distance learning setting. In Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2017 IEEE (pp. 1373–1377).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lonn, S., Aguilar, S. J., & Teasley, S. D. (2015). Investigating student motivation in the context of a learning analytics intervention during a summer bridge program. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 90–97.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Marbouti, F., Diefes-Dux, H. A., & Madhavan, K. (2016). Models for early prediction of at-risk students in a course using standards-based grading. Computers & Education, 103, 1–15.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. K., & Knight, S. L. (2016). Exploring a century of advancements in the science of learning. Review of Research in Education, 40(1), 402–456.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Na, K. S., & Tasir, Z. (2017). A systematic review of learning analytics intervention contributing to student success in online learning. In International Conference on Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering (LaTICE) 2017 (pp. 62–68).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ormrod, J. E. (1999). Human learning (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, D. C. (2014). Research in the hard sciences, and in very hard “softer” domains. Educational Researcher, 43(1), 9–11.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Romero-Zaldivar, V. A., Pardo, A., Burgos, D., & Kloos, C. D. (2012). Monitoring student progress using virtual appliances: A case study. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1058–1067.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, E., Asbell-Clarke, J., Baker, R. S., Eagle, M., Hicks, A. G., Barnes, T. M., … Edwards, T. (2017). Assessing implicit science learning in digital games. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 617–630.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th. ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • SCImago. (2007). SJR—SCImago Journal & Country Rank. Retrieved July 21, 2015, from http://www.scimagojr.com.

  • Sedrakyan, G., Snoeck, M., & de Weerdt, J. (2014). Process mining analysis of conceptual modeling behavior of novices–empirical study using JMermaid modeling and experimental logging environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 486–503.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Siadaty, M., Gašević, D., & Hatala, M. (2016). Associations between technological scaffolding and micro-level processes of self-regulated learning: A workplace study. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1007–1019.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Siemens, G., & Long, P. (2011). Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. Educause Review, 48(5), 31–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. (1977). Why I am not a cognitive psychologist. Behavior, 5(2), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 55, pp. 37–76). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabuenca, B., Kalz, M., Drachsler, H., & Specht, M. (2015). Time will tell: The role of mobile learning analytics in self-regulated learning. Computers & Education, 89, 53–74.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, J. P. L., Yang, S., Koh, E., & Jonathan, C. (2016). Fostering twenty-first century literacies through a collaborative critical reading and learning analytics environment: user-perceived benefits and problematics. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (pp. 430–434).

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurlings, M., Vermeulen, M., Bastiaens, T., & Stijnen, S. (2013). Understanding feedback: A learning theory perspective. Educational Research Review, 9, 1–15.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tlili, A., Essalmi, F., Jemni, M., & Chen, N. S. (2016). Role of personality in computer based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 805–813.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, G. (1997). Deconstructing deep and surface: Towards a critique of phenomenography. Higher Education, 33(2), 195–212.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Yassine, S., Kadry, S., & Sicilia, M. A. (2016). A framework for learning analytics in moodle for assessing course outcomes. In Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2016 IEEE (pp. 261–266).

    Google Scholar 

  • You, J. W. (2016). Identifying significant indicators using LMS data to predict course achievement in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 29, 23–30.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y., Davis, D., Chen, G., Lofi, C., Hauff, C., & Houben, G. J. (2017). Certificate achievement unlocked: how does MOOC learners’ behaviour change? In Adjunct Publication of the 25th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (pp. 83–88).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhuhadar, L., Yang, R., & Lytras, M. D. (2013). The impact of Social Multimedia Systems on cyberlearners. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(2), 378–385.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J., & Campillo, M. (2003). Motivating self-regulated problem solvers. In J. E. Davidson & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of problem solving (pp. 233–262). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is supported by Leiden-Delft-Erasmus Centre for Education and Learning.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jacqueline Wong .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wong, J. et al. (2019). Educational Theories and Learning Analytics: From Data to Knowledge. In: Ifenthaler, D., Mah, DK., Yau, JK. (eds) Utilizing Learning Analytics to Support Study Success. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64792-0_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64792-0_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-64791-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-64792-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)