A Multidimensional Evaluation Framework for Personal Learning Environments

Evaluating highly dynamic and heterogeneous Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) is extremely challenging. Components of PLEs are selected and configured by individual users based on their personal preferences, needs, and goals. Moreover, the systems usually evolve over time based on contextual opportunities and constraints. As such dynamic systems have no predefined configurations and user interfaces, traditional evaluation methods often fall short or are even inappropriate. Obviously, a host of factors influence the extent to which a PLE successfully supports a learner to achieve specific learning outcomes. We categorize such factors along four major dimensions: technological, organizational, psycho-pedagogical, and social. Each dimension is informed by relevant theoretical models (e.g., Information System Success Model, Community of Practice, self-regulated learning) and subsumes a set of metrics that can be assessed with a range of approaches. Among others, usability and user experience play an indispensable role in acceptance and diffusion of the innovative technologies exemplified by PLEs. Traditional quantitative and qualitative methods such as questionnaire and interview should be deployed alongside emergent ones such as learning analytics (e.g., context-aware metadata) and narrative-based methods. Crucial for maximal validity of the evaluation is the triangulation of empirical findings with multi-perspective (end-users, developers, and researchers), mixed-method (qualitative, quantitative) data sources. The framework utilizes a cyclic process to integrate findings across cases with a cross-case analysis in order to gain deeper insights into the intriguing questions of how and why PLEs work.

[1]  Antonella De Angeli,et al.  Framing the user experience: information biases on website quality judgement , 2008, CHI.

[2]  John M. Carroll,et al.  Data Logging: Higher-Level Capturing and Multi-Level Abstracting of User Activities , 2000 .

[3]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  The Inference of Perceived Usability From Beauty , 2010, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[4]  E. Wenger Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[5]  Stephanie Rosenbaum,et al.  Usability in practice: field methods evolution and revolution , 2002, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[6]  Mathias Lux,et al.  The Web 2.0 way of learning with technologies , 2007, Int. J. Learn. Technol..

[7]  M. van Harmelen,et al.  Personal Learning Environments , 2006, Sixth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT'06).

[8]  B. Latour Technology is Society Made Durable , 1990 .

[9]  D. Hunter,et al.  Qualitative Research: Consensus methods for medical and health services research , 1995 .

[10]  F. Herzberg One more time: how do you motivate employees? 1968. , 2003, Harvard business review.

[11]  Kasper Hornbæk,et al.  Old wine in new bottles or novel challenges: a critical analysis of empirical studies of user experience , 2011, CHI.

[12]  J. B. Brooke,et al.  SUS: A 'Quick and Dirty' Usability Scale , 1996 .

[13]  Carlos Delgado Kloos,et al.  Generic service integration in adaptive learning experiences using IMS learning design , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[14]  B. Zimmerman Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview , 2002 .

[15]  Peter C. Wright,et al.  Funology: from usability to enjoyment , 2005 .

[16]  Tom Tullis,et al.  Measuring the User Experience, Second Edition: Collecting, Analyzing, and Presenting Usability Metrics , 2013 .

[17]  Sandy El Helou,et al.  Evaluating Agile PLE Enablers , 2011 .

[18]  A. Efklides The role of metacognitive experiences in the learning process. , 2009, Psicothema.

[19]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  MARC HASSENZAHL CHAPTER 3 The Thing and I: Understanding the Relationship Between User and Product , 2003 .

[20]  Virpi Roto,et al.  User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs , 2010, NordiCHI.

[21]  A. Delbecq,et al.  Nominal Versus Interacting Group Processes for Committee Decision-Making Effectiveness , 1971 .

[22]  L. Cohen,et al.  Research Methods in Education , 1980 .

[23]  Sandra Schön,et al.  Persönliche Lernumgebungen: Grundlagen, Möglichkeiten und Herausforderungen eines neuen Konzepts. , 2008 .

[24]  Leonard A. Steverson Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards , 2005 .

[25]  F. Herzberg One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees? , 2008 .

[26]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  The Structure and Function of Complex Networks , 2003, SIAM Rev..

[27]  A. N. Oppenheim,et al.  Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement , 1992 .

[28]  M. van Harmelen Personal Learning Environments , 2006 .

[29]  J. Russell Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. , 2003, Psychological review.

[30]  Ulrik Brandes,et al.  Network Analysis: Methodological Foundations , 2010 .

[31]  T. Landauer,et al.  Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction , 1997 .

[32]  A. Barabasi The Architecture of Complexity From network structure to human dynamics , 2007 .

[33]  R. Kahn,et al.  The Dynamics of Interviewing , 1957 .

[34]  Fridolin Wild,et al.  Reflection - quantifying a rare good , 2013, ARTEL@EC-TEL.

[35]  Murray Turoff,et al.  The design of a policy Delphi , 1970 .

[36]  Clayton Lewis,et al.  Chapter 30 – Cognitive Walkthroughs , 1997 .

[37]  Mark J. W. Lee,et al.  Personalised and Self Regulated Learning in the Web 2.0 Era: International Exemplars of Innovative Pedagogy Using Social Software. , 2010 .

[38]  Fred D. Davis Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[39]  B. Thomas,et al.  Usability Evaluation In Industry , 1996 .

[40]  Amy Jo Kim,et al.  Community Building on the Web: Secret Strategies for Successful Online Communities , 2000 .

[41]  D. Watson,et al.  Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[42]  Claude Ghaoui,et al.  Encyclopedia of Human Computer Interaction , 2005 .

[43]  Karl Steffens,et al.  Self‐Regulated Learning in Technology‐Enhanced Learning Environments: lessons of a European peer review , 2006 .

[44]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[45]  David Collier,et al.  Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards , 2004 .

[46]  Andreas Holzinger,et al.  Usability engineering methods for software developers , 2005, CACM.

[47]  Jonathan L. Herlocker,et al.  Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems , 2004, TOIS.

[48]  Graham Attwell,et al.  Personal Learning Environments - the future of eLearning? , 2007 .

[49]  Charles C. Ragin,et al.  TURNING THE TABLES: HOW CASE-ORIENTED RESEARCH CHALLENGES VARIABLE-ORIENTED RESEARCH , 1997 .

[50]  Y. Rogers,et al.  Interaction Design , 2002 .

[51]  Wolfgang Reinhardt,et al.  Proceedings of the 1st European Workshop on Awareness and Reflection in Learning Networks. In conjunction with the 6th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning: Towards Ubiquitous Learning 2011. Palermo, Italy, September 21, 2011 , 2011 .

[52]  S. Vaughn,et al.  Focus Group Interviews in Education and Psychology , 1996 .

[53]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[54]  Ralf Klamma,et al.  Emerging Research Topics in Social Learning , 2010 .

[55]  Erik Duval,et al.  Tracking Actual Usage: the Attention Metadata Approach , 2007, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[56]  K. Scherer What are emotions? And how can they be measured? , 2005 .

[57]  J. Bell Conducting small-scale investigations in educational management , 1984 .

[58]  Sheri Berman Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences , 2007, Perspectives on Politics.

[59]  Alexander Felfernig,et al.  Measuring Emotions: Towards rapid and low cost methodologies , 2011, RecSys 2011.

[60]  Alexandre N. Tuch,et al.  Analyzing users' narratives to understand experience with interactive products , 2013, CHI.

[61]  Mi Wang,et al.  Positioning Theory, Roles and the Design and Implementation of Learning Technology , 2011, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[62]  Blair MacIntyre,et al.  Adapting to Registration Error in an Intent-based Augmentation System , 2004 .

[63]  Mark William Johnson,et al.  The Personal Learning Environment and the human condition: from theory to teaching practice , 2008, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[64]  M. Turoff The Policy Delphi , 2022 .

[65]  V. Vroom Work and motivation , 1964 .

[66]  E. Rogers Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[67]  Karen Holtzblatt,et al.  Contextual design , 1997, INTR.

[68]  Paul van Schaik,et al.  Attitudes towards user experience (UX) measurement , 2014, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[69]  C. Mutch Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods [Book Review] , 2006 .

[70]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  Evaluating Learning Designs through the Formal Representation of Pedagogical Patterns , 2011 .

[71]  J. Law A Sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology, and domination , 1991 .

[72]  M E J Newman,et al.  Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. , 2003, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[73]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[74]  Maren Scheffel,et al.  Analyzing Contextualized Attention Metadata with Rough Set Methodologies to Support Self-regulated Learning , 2010, 2010 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies.

[75]  A. Przeworski,et al.  The logic of comparative social inquiry , 1970 .

[76]  Virpi Roto,et al.  Understanding, scoping and defining user experience: a survey approach , 2009, CHI.

[77]  R. Mason,et al.  Using Web 2.0 for learning in the community , 2007, Internet High. Educ..

[78]  A. Maslow Motivation and Personality , 1954 .

[79]  Keith N. Hampton,et al.  Long Distance Community in the Network Society , 2001 .

[80]  Alexander Mikroyannidis,et al.  Personal Learning Environments in the Workplace: An Exploratory Study into the Key Business Decision Factors , 2013, Int. J. Virtual Pers. Learn. Environ..

[81]  George K Freeman,et al.  Short CommunicationThe impact of a student learning journal: a two-stage evaluation using the Nominal Group Technique , 2003, Medical teacher.

[82]  Matthew B. Miles,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 1994 .

[83]  A. Renkl,et al.  How multiple external representations are used and how they can be made more useful , 2009 .

[84]  Joseph F. Dumas,et al.  Usability Testing: Current Practice And Future Directions , 2007 .

[85]  D. Roy Grounding words in perception and action: computational insights , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[86]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Group Techniques for Program Planning , 1975 .

[87]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a Research Agenda on Interventions , 2008, Decis. Sci..

[88]  L. Freeman Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification , 1978 .

[89]  H. Gardner,et al.  Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences , 1983 .

[90]  Ephraim R. McLean,et al.  The DeLone and McLean Model of Information Systems Success: A Ten-Year Update , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[91]  Ulrik Brandes,et al.  Network Analysis: Methodological Foundations (Lecture Notes in Computer Science) , 2005 .

[92]  Maren Scheffel,et al.  Analysing Contextualized Attention Metadata for Self-regulated Learning - A Supporting Framework for Self-Monitoring and Self-Reflection , 2010, CSEDU.

[93]  Nicholas M. Allix Book Review: Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 2000 .

[94]  Sharon L. Milgram,et al.  The Small World Problem , 1967 .

[95]  J. Jacko,et al.  The human-computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies and emerging applications , 2002 .

[96]  John C. McCarthy,et al.  Technology as experience , 2004, INTR.

[97]  Alistair Croll,et al.  Complete Web monitoring , 2009 .

[98]  Alan D. Smith,et al.  Knowledge management strategies: a multi-case study , 2004, J. Knowl. Manag..

[99]  C. Riessman Narrative Methods for the Human Sciences , 2007 .

[100]  Anjan Chatterjee,et al.  Language and space: some interactions , 2001, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[101]  Sharan B. Merriam,et al.  Qualitative research and case study applications in education , 1998 .

[102]  Katharina Scheiter,et al.  Eye tracking as a tool to study and enhance multimedia learning , 2010 .

[103]  B. Fredrickson,et al.  Measurement issues in emotion research. , 1999 .

[104]  Stephen Farrell,et al.  Socially augmenting employee profiles with people-tagging , 2007, UIST.

[105]  Hung-Pin Shih,et al.  Technology-push and communication-pull forces driving message-based coordination performance , 2006, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[106]  Henry Teune,et al.  The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry.@@@The Methodology of Comparative Research. , 1971 .

[107]  Bettina Berendt,et al.  Study on Contexts in Tracking Usage and Attention Metadata in Multilingual Technology Enhanced Learning , 2009, GI Jahrestagung.

[108]  A.-L. Barabasi,et al.  The Architecture of Complexity , 2007, IEEE Control Systems.

[109]  Samia Khan,et al.  Cultivating the Under-Mined: Cross-Case Analysis as Knowledge Mobilization , 2008 .

[110]  D. Hand Measurement Theory and Practice: The World Through Quantification , 2004 .

[111]  C Giovannella,et al.  Virtual learning places: a perspective on future learning environments and experiences , 2011 .