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.
- Learning theories
- Big data
- Learning analytics
- Study success
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use onlyLearn about institutional subscriptions
Alexander, P. A. (2006). Evolution of a learning theory: A case study. Educational Psychologist, 41(4), 257–264.
Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. L., & Reynolds, R. E. (2009). What is learning anyway? A topographical perspective considered. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 176–192.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25(4), 297–308.
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.
Ausubel, D. P. (1969). A cognitive theory of school learning. Psychology in the Schools, 6(4), 331–335.
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.
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).
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.
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.
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245–281.
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).
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).
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
Ferguson, R. (2012). Learning analytics: Drivers, developments and challenges. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5–6), 304–317.
Gašević, D., Dawson, S., & Siemens, G. (2015). Let’s not forget: Learning analytics are about learning. TechTrends, 59(1), 64–71.
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.
Greller, W., & Drachsler, H. (2012). Translating learning into numbers: A generic framework for learning analytics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 42–57.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Junco, R., & Clem, C. (2015). Predicting course outcomes with digital textbook usage data. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 54–63.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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).
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.
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.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
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.
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).
Ormrod, J. E. (1999). Human learning (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Phillips, D. C. (2014). Research in the hard sciences, and in very hard “softer” domains. Educational Researcher, 43(1), 9–11.
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.
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.
Schunk, D. H. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective (6th. ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
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.
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.
Siemens, G., & Long, P. (2011). Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. Educause Review, 48(5), 31–40.
Skinner, B. F. (1977). Why I am not a cognitive psychologist. Behavior, 5(2), 1–10.
Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 55, pp. 37–76). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
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.
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).
Thurlings, M., Vermeulen, M., Bastiaens, T., & Stijnen, S. (2013). Understanding feedback: A learning theory perspective. Educational Research Review, 9, 1–15.
Tlili, A., Essalmi, F., Jemni, M., & Chen, N. S. (2016). Role of personality in computer based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 805–813.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Webb, G. (1997). Deconstructing deep and surface: Towards a critique of phenomenography. Higher Education, 33(2), 195–212.
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.
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).
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.
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).
Zhuhadar, L., Yang, R., & Lytras, M. D. (2013). The impact of Social Multimedia Systems on cyberlearners. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(2), 378–385.
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.
This research is supported by Leiden-Delft-Erasmus Centre for Education and Learning.
Editors and Affiliations
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wong, J. et al. (2019). Educational Theories and Learning Analytics: From Data to Knowledge. In: Ifenthaler, D., Mah, DK., Yau, J.YK. (eds) Utilizing Learning Analytics to Support Study Success. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64792-0_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-64791-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-64792-0