Theory-based learning analytics to explore student engagement patterns in a peer review activity

Peer reviews offer many learning benefits. Understanding students’ engagement in them can help design effective practices. Although learning analytics can be effective in generating such insights, its application in peer reviews is scarce. Theory can provide the necessary foundations to inform the design of learning analytics research and the interpretation of its results. In this paper, we followed a theory-based learning analytics approach to identifying students’ engagement patterns in a peer review activity facilitated via a web-based tool called Synergy. Process mining was applied on temporal learning data, traced by Synergy. The theory about peer review helped determine relevant data points and guided the top-down approach employed for their analysis: moving from the global phases to regulation of learning, and then to micro-level actions. The results suggest that theory and learning analytics should mutually relate with each other. Mainly, theory played a critical role in identifying a priori engagement patterns, which provided an informed perspective when interpreting the results. In return, the results of the learning analytics offered critical insights about student behavior that was not expected by the theory (i.e., low levels of co-regulation). The findings provided important implications for refining the grounding theory and its operationalization in Synergy.

[1]  Jonna Malmberg,et al.  Capturing temporal and sequential patterns of self-, co-, and socially shared regulation in the context of collaborative learning , 2017 .

[2]  David Boud,et al.  Researching feedback dialogue: an interactional analysis approach , 2017 .

[3]  Chia-Wen Tsai,et al.  Applying web-based co-regulated learning to develop students' learning and involvement in a blended computing course , 2015, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[4]  Peter Reimann,et al.  Connecting learning analytics with learning research: the role of design-based research , 2016 .

[5]  Chi Baik,et al.  How does student peer review influence perceptions, engagement and academic outcomes? A case study , 2014 .

[6]  Marek Hatala,et al.  Trace-based Micro-analytic Measurement of Self-Regulated Learning Processes , 2016, J. Learn. Anal..

[7]  Robert A. Nash,et al.  Supporting Learners' Agentic Engagement With Feedback: A Systematic Review and a Taxonomy of Recipience Processes , 2017 .

[8]  Avril Thomson,et al.  Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective , 2014 .

[9]  A. Wise,et al.  Why Theory Matters More than Ever in the Age of Big Data , 2015, J. Learn. Anal..

[10]  Yannis A. Dimitriadis,et al.  Aligning learning design and learning analytics through instructor involvement: a MOOC case study , 2019, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[11]  Dragan Gasevic,et al.  Trace-SRL: A Framework for Analysis of Microlevel Processes of Self-Regulated Learning From Trace Data , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies.

[12]  P. Reimann,et al.  Process mining techniques for analysing patterns and strategies in students’ self-regulated learning , 2013, Metacognition and Learning.

[13]  Dragan Gasevic,et al.  Learning analytics to unveil learning strategies in a flipped classroom , 2017, Internet High. Educ..

[14]  Chi Baik,et al.  Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation , 2014 .

[15]  Wil M. P. van der Aalst,et al.  Fuzzy Mining - Adaptive Process Simplification Based on Multi-perspective Metrics , 2007, BPM.

[16]  Chia-Wen Tsai,et al.  The effect of online co-regulated learning in the implementation of team-based learning on improving students’ involvement , 2015 .

[17]  D. Gašević,et al.  A collaborative learning approach to dialogic peer feedback: a theoretical framework , 2020, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education.