The pragmatic maxim as learning analytics research method

It is arguable that the chief aim of Learning Analytics is to use analytics for meaningful purposes in learning and teaching contexts, and that research in the field should advance this cause. However the field does not present a single clear understanding of what constitutes quality in Learning Analytics research. In this paper we present the Pragmatic Inquiry for Learning Analytics Research (PILAR) method as one approach to conducting Learning Analytics research. Rather than creating a new method, we reintroduce an old method to a new field, drawing on the Pragmatic Maxim, proposed by Charles Sanders Peirce as a principle for making ideas clear. Our instantiation of the Pragmatic Maxim requires the researcher to situate Learning Analytics research within a clearly defined learning context and to consider the analytics in terms of the practical effects on learning. We propose three essential elements and a five step process for addressing them in research. After presenting PILAR we address two potential limitations of the approach, and conclude with some implications for its future use in Learning Analytics research.

[1]  George Siemens,et al.  Let’s not forget: Learning analytics are about learning , 2015 .

[2]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches , 1966 .

[3]  C. Peirce.  How to Make Our Ideas Clear , 2011, The Nature of Truth.

[4]  C. Peirce,et al.  The Fixation of Belief , 2011, Philosophy after Darwin.

[5]  W. H. Hill.  Peirce's "Pragmatic" Method , 1940, Philosophy of Science.

[6]  Dragan Gasevic,et al.  Handbook of Learning Analytics , 2017 .

[7]  George Siemens,et al.  Learning analytics and educational data mining: towards communication and collaboration , 2012, LAK.

[8]  Katrien Verbert,et al.  Learning analytics as a "middle space" , 2013, LAK '13.

[9]  Joseph E. Beck,et al.  Limits to accuracy: how well can we do at student modeling? , 2013, EDM.

[10]  Leah P. Macfadyen.  Overcoming Barriers to Educational Analytics: How Systems Thinking and Pragmatism Can Help , 2017 .

[11]  Hendrik Drachsler,et al.  Translating Learning into Numbers: A Generic Framework for Learning Analytics , 2012, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[12]  Rebecca Ferguson,et al.  Learning analytics: drivers, developments and challenges , 2012 .

[13]  Charles S. Peirce,et al.  What Pragmatism Is , 1905 .

[14]  Henry A. Ruger,et al.  What Pragmatism Is. , 1905 .

[15]  Guillaume Durand,et al.  A Critical Perspective on Learning Analytics and Educational Data Mining , 2017 .

[16]  C. Judd,et al.  Pragmatism. A new name for some old ways of thinking. , 1908 .

[17]  Chihab El Khachab.  The Logical Goodness of Abduction in C. S. Peirce’s Thought , 2013 .

[18]  Stefaan Ternier,et al.  The Proof of the Pudding: Examining Validity and Reliability of the Evaluation Framework for Learning Analytics , 2017, EC-TEL.

[19]  C. Peirce,et al.  Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce , 1936, Nature.

[20]  Atocha Aliseda,et al.  Abduction as Epistemic Change: A Peircean Model in Artificial Intelligence , 2000 .

[21]  Laurie P. Dringus,et al.  Learning Analytics Considered Harmful. , 2012 .

[22]  Doug Clow,et al.  The learning analytics cycle: closing the loop effectively , 2012, LAK.

[23]  Andrew Gibson,et al.  Reflective writing analytics and transepistemic abduction , 2017 .