“Make It Personal!” - Gathering Input from Stakeholders for a Learning Analytics-Supported Learning Design Tool

  • Marcel SchmitzEmail author
  • Maren Scheffel
  • Evelien van Limbeek
  • Roger Bemelmans
  • Hendrik Drachsler
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11082)


Teachers design learning activities purposefully to improve student learning. However, the impact of this is usually only evaluated after a course has ended by making use of self-reported data and assessment results. Learning analytics offers the opportunity to collect, analyse and visualise feedback on activities using authentic data in real-time. Incorporating learning analytics into the learning design makes just-in-time interventions attainable. This paper presents the first steps of the development of a Learning Analytics for Learning Design (LA4LD) tool that is co-created with students and teachers, using a design-based research methodology. Both teachers and students express the need to personalise feedback on learning activities in order to increase the quality of the learning process and want that embedded in the tool.


Learning analytics Learning design User-centred design Teachers Students Higher education 


  1. 1.
    Beetham, H., Sharpe, R.: Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing for 21st Century Learning. Routledge, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dziuban, C., Graham, C.R., Moskal, P.D., Norberg, A., Sicilia, N.: Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 15(1), 3 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Florian-Gaviria, B., Glahn, C., Gesa, R.F.: A software suite for efficient use of the European qualifications framework in online and blended courses. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 6(3), 283–296 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design science in information systems research. MIS Q. 28(1), 75–105 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jivet, I., Scheffel, M., Drachsler, H., Specht, M.: Awareness is not enough: pitfalls of learning analytics dashboards in the educational practice. In: Lavoué, É., Drachsler, H., Verbert, K., Broisin, J., Pérez-Sanagustín, M. (eds.) EC-TEL 2017. LNCS, vol. 10474, pp. 82–96. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jivet, I., Scheffel, M., Specht, M., Drachsler, H.: License to evaluate: preparing learning analytics dashboards for educational practice. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, pp. 31–40. ACM, New York (2018)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lockyer, L., Heathcote, E., Dawson, S.: Informing pedagogical action: aligning learning analytics with learning design. Am. Behav. Sci. 57(10), 1439–1459 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mor, Y., Craft, B.: Learning design: mapping the landscape (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nelson, J., Campbell, C.: Evidence-informed practice in education: meanings and applications. Educ. Res. 59(2), 127–135 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nguyen, Q., Rienties, B., Toetenel, L., Ferguson, R., Whitelock, D.: Examining the designs of computer-based assessment and its impact on student engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates. Comput. Hum. Behav. 76, 703–714 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Park, Y., Jo, I.H.: Development of the learning analytics dashboard to support students’ learning performance. J. Univ. Comput. Sci. 21(1), 110–133 (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pintrich, P., Smith, D., Garcia, T., Wilbert, M.: A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rauth, I., Köppen, E., Jobst, B., Meinel, C.: Design thinking: an educational model towards creative confidence. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Design Creativity (ICDC) (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rienties, B., Toetenel, L.: The impact of 151 learning designs on student satisfaction and performance: social learning (analytics) matters. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, pp. 339–343. ACM, New York (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Roth, A., Ogrin, S., Schmitz, B.: Assessing self-regulated learning in higher education: a systematic literature review of self-report instruments. Educ. Assess. Eval. Account. 28(3), 225–250 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Santos, J.L., Verbert, K., Duval, E.: Empowering students to reflect on their activity with StepUp!: two case studies with engineering students. In: Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on Awareness and Reflection (ARTEL), pp. 73–86 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schmitz, M., van Limbeek, E., Greller, W., Sloep, P., Drachsler, H.: Opportunities and challenges in using learning analytics in learning design. In: Lavoué, É., Drachsler, H., Verbert, K., Broisin, J., Pérez-Sanagustín, M. (eds.) EC-TEL 2017. LNCS, vol. 10474, pp. 209–223. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schwendimann, B.A., et al.: Perceiving learning at a glance: a systematic literature review of learning dashboard research. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 10(1), 30–41 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Van Laer, S., Elen, J.: In search of attributes that support self-regulation in blended learning environments. Educ. Inf. Technol. 22(4), 1395–1454 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zimmerman, B.J.: Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an overview. Educ. Psychol. 25(1), 3–17 (1990)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcel Schmitz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Maren Scheffel
    • 2
  • Evelien van Limbeek
    • 1
  • Roger Bemelmans
    • 1
  • Hendrik Drachsler
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Zuyd University of Applied SciencesHeerlenNetherlands
  2. 2.Open UniversiteitHeerlenNetherlands
  3. 3.Goethe UniversityFrankfurtGermany
  4. 4.German Institute for International Educational Research (DIPF)FrankfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations