Impact of GUI personalization of a word processor on a learning activity course

This research investigates the impact of an activity of personalization of a graphical user interface by the learners, on their behavior of using the ILE. The analysis conducted is based on an exploitation of the interaction traces between the learner and the interface of a word processor software with advanced personalization and auto-writing features including training of spelling and a learning analytics management module. The results show that, several variables related to the facilitation conditions recognized by the ILE partly explain the writing activity. Navigation variable can be correlated with the knowledge of customization possibilities. If the automatic sentence generator has no significant effect on the number of misspellings found in the documents submitted, the intention to personalize the interface seems to have a greater effect than the act of personalization itself. But the impact of the personalization process on learning outcomes is still to be established.

[1]  I. Grief,et al.  Computer Supported Cooperative Work: A Book of Readings , 1988 .

[2]  Richard G. Baraniuk,et al.  Tag-Aware Ordinal Sparse Factor Analysis for Learning and Content Analytics , 2014, EDM.

[3]  E. Duval,et al.  Formative assessment and learning analytics , 2013 .

[4]  Pierre Tchounikine,et al.  Précis de recherche en Ingénierie des EIAH , 2009 .

[5]  Francisco J. García-Peñalvo,et al.  Exploring Software Engineering Subjects by Using Visual Learning Analytics Techniques , 2015, IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje.

[6]  T. B. Ward Structured Imagination: the Role of Category Structure in Exemplar Generation , 1994, Cognitive Psychology.

[7]  Ivan E. Sutherland,et al.  Sketchpad a Man-Machine Graphical Communication System , 1899, Outstanding Dissertations in the Computer Sciences.

[8]  É. Bruillard Quelle informatique à repenser et à construire pour les élèves de l’école primaire ? , 2016 .

[9]  M. Linard,et al.  Concevoir des environnements pour apprendre : l'activité humaine, cadre organisateur de l'interactivité technique , 2001 .

[10]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Example-Tracing Tutors: Intelligent Tutor Development for Non-programmers , 2016, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education.

[11]  Pierre Tchounikine,et al.  Flexibility in macro-scripts for computer-supported collaborative learning , 2007, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[12]  J. Barcenilla,et al.  THÉORIES ET MÉTHODOLOGIES THEORIES AND METHODOLOGIES L'ACCEPTABILITÉ DES NOUVELLES TECHNOLOGIES : QUELLES RELATIONS AVEC L'ERGONOMIE, L'UTILISABILITÉ ET L'EXPÉRIENCE UTILISATEUR ? , 2009 .

[13]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  Predicting Different Conceptualizations of System Use: The Competing Roles of Behavioral Intention, Facilitating Conditions, and Behavioral Expectation , 2008, MIS Q..

[14]  André Tricot,et al.  Utilisation d'un hypermédia et apprentissage : deux activités concurrentes ou complémentaires ? , 2006 .