Öğrenme Analitiklerinin Öğrenme Tasarımı ile Çerçevelendirilmesi Üzerine Bir Derleme Çalışması

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 3, 400 - 416, 01.12.2022

Denizer Yıldırım

https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.1054405

Öz

Öğrenme Tasarımı, öğrenci hangi aktiviteyi ne zaman, ne kadar sürede ve hangi sırada yaparsa daha iyi öğrenebilir sorusunun yanıtlanması için bir topluluk etkileşimini tanımlamaktadır. Öğrenme tasarımının iyileştirilmesi için öğrenme analitikleri kanıta dayalı olarak içgörü oluşturulması, karar alınması ve eyleme geçilmesi yönünden önemlidir. Bu içgörü, karar ve eylemlerin farklı durumlara transfer edilebilmesi için öğrenme analitiklerin hangi öğrenme tasarımı bağlamında kullanıldığına daha fazla odaklanılması gereksinimi ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, öğrenme analitikleri sürecinin niçin öğrenme tasarımı ile çevrelenmesi gereksiniminden ve alanyazındaki çerçevelerin sunduğu geniş bakış açılarından yola çıkarak; öğrenme analitiklerine dayalı içgörü, karar ve eylemlerin daha işlevsel olması için, öğrenme analitiklerinin hangi bağlamda ele alındığını kolaylaştıracak çerçeveler özetlenmiş ve daha işlevsel bulunanlar tartışılmıştır. E-öğrenme için öğrenme türleri ve etkinlik tasarımı olarak önerilen öğrenme tasarımı çerçeveleri, Öğrenme Yönetim Sistemi (ÖYS) içerisinde online derslerin tasarımında kolaylıkla kullanılabilecek sınıflamalar içermektedir. Analitik Katmanları Çerçevesi bir öğrenme analitiği uygulamasında hangi analitiklere odaklanılacağı konusunu çok boyutlu bir perspektiften örneklendirmektedir. Tartışılan çerçevelerin gelecekteki çalışmalar için temel alınması, öğrenme tasarımı ve öğrenme analitikleri etkileşiminden doğan içgörü, karar ve eylemlerin farklı bağlamlar için güncellenerek uygulanmasını mümkün hale getirebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Öğrenme Tasarımı, Öğrenme Analitikleri, Öğrenme Tasarımı ile Öğrenme Tasarımı Çerçeveleri.

A review on Framing Learning Analytics with Learning Design

Öz

Learning Design defines a community interaction to answer the question "May the student learn better when they do which activity, when, for how long, and in what order." Learning analytics is important in terms of creating evidence-based insights, decisions, and actions for improving learning design. More focus should be placed on the learning design context in which learning analytics are used to transfer these insights, decisions, and actions to different situations. In this study, starting from the need to surround the learning analytics with learning design and the broad perspectives offered by the frameworks in the literature; frameworks that will facilitate the context in which learning analytics are handled are summarized and the more functional ones are discussed. Learning design frameworks proposed as learning types and activity designs for e-learning include classifications that can be easily used in the design of online courses within the Learning Management System (LMS). The Analytics Layers Framework exemplifies what analytics to focus on in learning analytics from a multidimensional perspective. For future research, the discussed frameworks may enable the insights, decisions, and actions arising from the interaction of learning design and learning analytics to be updated and applied to different contexts.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Learning Design, Learning Analytics, Learning Design and Learning Design Frameworks.

Kaynakça

• Akçapınar, G. ve Bilgin, Ç. U. (2020). Öğrenme Analitiklerine Dayalı Oyunlaştırılmış Gösterge Paneli Kullanımının Öğrencilerin Çevrimiçi Öğrenme Ortamındaki Bağlılıklarına Etkisi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 28(4), 1892-1901. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.740489
• Andrews, D. H. ve Goodson, L. A. (1980). A comparative analysis of models of instructional design. Journal of instructional development, 3(4), 2-16.
• Bakharia, A., Corrin, L., De Barba, P., Kennedy, G., Gašević, D., Mulder, R., ... ve Lockyer, L. (2016, April). A conceptual framework linking learning design with learning analytics. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on learning analytics & knowledge (pp. 329-338). https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883944
• Bayazıt, A. ve Akçapınar, G. (2018). Çevrimiçi dersler için video analitik aracının tasarlanması ve geliştirilmesi. Elementary Education Online, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2018.413719
• Bayrak, F. ve Yurdugül, H. (2016). Web-Tabanlı Öz-Değerlendirme Sisteminde Öğrenci Uyarı İndeksini Temel Alan Öğrenme Analitiği Modülünün Tasarlanması. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 6(2), 85-99. https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.59549
• Belland, B. R. (2009). Using the theory of habitus to move beyond the study of barriers to technology integration. Computers & Education, 52(2), 353-364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.09.004
• Bennett, S., Agostinho, S. ve Lockyer, L. (2015). Technology tools to support learning design: Implications derived from an investigation of university teachers’ design practices. Computers and Education, 81, 211–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.016.
• Bond, J. ve Dirkin, K. (2020). What Models are Instructional Designers Using Today?. The Journal of Applied Instructional Design, 9(2).
• Clow, D. (2012, April). The learning analytics cycle: closing the loop effectively. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 134-138). https://doi.org/10.1145/2330601.2330636
• Conole G. (2012) Introduction. In: Designing for Learning in an Open World. Explorations in the Learning Sciences, Instructional Systems and Performance Technologies, vol 4. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8517-0_1
• Cross, S., Galley, R., Brasher, A. ve Weller, M. (2012). OULDI-JISC Project Evaluation Report: the impact of new curriculum design tools and approaches on institutional process and design cultures. OULDI Project (Open University).
• Dalziel, J., Conole, G., Wills, S., Walker, S., Bennett, S., Dobozy, E., … ve Bower, M. (2016). The Larnaca Declaration on Learning Design. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2016(1), 7. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/jime.407
• Dick, W., Carey, L. ve Carey, J. O. (2001). The systematic design of instruction. 6th. New York: Longmann.
• Dobozy, E. (2013). Learning design research: advancing pedagogies in the digital age. Educational Media International, 50(1), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2013.777181
• Earp, J., Ott, M. ve Pozzi, F. (2013). Facilitating educators’ knowledge sharing with dedicated Information Systems. Computers in human behavior, 29(2), 445-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.009
• Ertmer, P. A. ve Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance improvement quarterly, 6(4), 50-72.
• Greller, W. ve Drachsler, H. (2012). Translating learning into numbers: A generic framework for learning analytics. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 42-57. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.15.3.42
• Gunn, C., McDonald, J., Donald, C., Nichols, M., Milne, J. ve Blumenstein, M. (2017). Building an evidence base for teaching and learning design using learning analytics. Project Report. Retrieved August 11, 2021, from https://ako.ac.nz/assets/Knowledge-centre/NPF-15-008-Building-an-Evidence-Base-for-Teaching-and-Learning-Design- Using-Learning-Analytics-Data/RESEARCH-REPORT-Building-an-evidence-base-for-teaching-and-learning-design-using-learning-analytics.pdf
• Hernández‐Leo, D., Martinez‐Maldonado, R., Pardo, A., Muñoz‐Cristóbal, J. A. ve Rodríguez‐Triana, M. J. (2019). Analytics for learning design: A layered framework and tools. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(1), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12645
• Holmes, W., Nguyen, Q., Zhang, J., Mavrikis, M. ve Rienties, B. (2019). Learning analytics for learning design in online distance learning. Distance Education, 40(3), 309-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2019.1637716
• Jesson, J., Matheson, L. ve Lacey, F.M. 2011. Doing your literature review: Traditional and systematic techniques, London: Sage.
• IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2003). IMS Learning Design Best Practice and Implementation Guide Version 1.0 Final. Retrieved August 11, 2021, from Imsglobal.org website: http://www.imsglobal.org/learningdesign/ldv1p0/imsld_bestv1p0.html
• Kaliisa, R., Kluge, A. ve Mørch, A. I. (2021). Overcoming Challenges to the Adoption of Learning Analytics at the Practitioner Level: A Critical Analysis of 18 Learning Analytics Frameworks. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2020.1869082
• Kaliisa, R., Mørch, A. I. ve Kluge, A. (2021). ‘My Point of Departure for Analytics is Extreme Skepticism’: Implications Derived from An Investigation of University Teachers’ Learning Analytics Perspectives and Design Practices. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 1-22. https://www.springerprofessional.de/link?doi=10.1007/s10758-020- 09488-w
• Keskin, S., Aydın, F. ve Yurdugül, H. (2019). Eğitsel veri madenciliği ve öğrenme analitikleri bağlamında e-öğrenme verilerinde aykırı gözlemlerin belirlenmesi. Eğitim Teknolojisi Kuram ve Uygulama, 6(2) https://doi.org/10.17943/etku.475149
• Kokoç, M. ve Altun, A. (2019). Effects of learner interaction with learning dashboards on academic performance in an e-learning environment. Behaviour & Information Technology, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2019.1680731
• Knight, S., Shum, S. B. ve Littleton, K. (2014). Epistemology, assessment, pedagogy: Where learning meets analytics in the middle space. Journal of Learning Analytics, 1(2), 23–47. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2014.12.3
• Larrabee Sønderlund, A., Hughes, E. ve Smith, J. (2019). The efficacy of learning analytics interventions in higher education: A systematic review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2594-2618. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12720
• Laurillard, D. ve McAndrew, P. (2002, March). Virtual Teaching Tools: Bringing academics closer to the design of e-learning. In Networked Learning Conference.
• Laurillard, D., Charlton, P., Craft, B., Dimakopoulos, D., Ljubojevic, D., Magoulas, G., ... ve Whittlestone, K. (2013). A constructionist learning environment for teachers to model learning designs. Journal of computer assisted learning, 29(1), 15-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00458.x
• Lockyer, L. ve Dawson, S. (2011, February). Learning designs and learning analytics. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on learning analytics and knowledge (pp. 153-156). https://doi.org/10.1145/2090116.2090140
• Lockyer, L., Heathcote, E. ve Dawson, S. (2013). Informing pedagogical action: Aligning learning analytics with learning design. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1439-1459. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0002764213479367
• Macfadyen, L. P., Lockyer, L. ve Rienties, B. (2020). Learning design and learning analytics: Snapshot 2020. Journal of Learning Analytics, 7(3), 6-12. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2020.73.2
• Mangaroska, K. ve Giannakos, M. (2019). Learning analytics for learning design: A systematic literature review of analytics-driven design to enhance learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 12(4), 516-534. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2018.2868673
• Martinez-Maldonado, R., Schneider, B., Charleer, S., Shum, S. B., Klerkx, J. ve Duval, E. (2016, April). Interactive surfaces and learning analytics: Data, orchestration aspects, pedagogical uses and challenges. In Proceedings of the Sixth international conference on learning analytics & knowledge (pp. 124-133). https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883873
• Mor, Y. ve Mogilevsky, O. (2013). The learning design studio: collaborative design inquiry as teachers' professional development. Research in Learning Technology, 21. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v21i0.22054
• Mor, Y., Ferguson, R. ve Wasson, B. (2015). Learning design, teacher inquiry into student learning and learning analytics: A call for action. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12273
• Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. J., Morrison, J. R. ve Kalman, H. K. (2019). Designing effective instruction. John Wiley & Sons.
• Nguyen, Q., Huptych, M. ve Rienties, B. (2018). Using temporal analytics to detect inconsistencies between learning design and student behaviours. Journal of Learning Analytics, 5(3), 120-135. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2018.53.8
• Nguyen, Q., Rienties, B. ve Whitelock, D. (2020). A mixed-method study into how instructors design for learning in online and distance education. Journal of Learning Analytics, In-press. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2020.73.6
• Nguyen, Q., Rienties, B., Toetenel, L., Ferguson, R. ve Whitelock, D. (2017). Examining the designs of computer-based assessment and its impact on student engagement, satisfaction, and pass rates. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 703-714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.028
• Persico, D. ve Pozzi, F. (2015). Informing learning design with learning analytics to improve teacher inquiry. British journal of educational technology, 46(2), 230-248. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12207
• Reiser, R. A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(2), 57– 67. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504928
• Rienties, B., Boroowa, A., Cross, S., Kubiak, C., Mayles, K. ve Murphy, S. (2016). Analytics4Action evaluation framework: A Review of evidence-based learning analytics interventions at the Open University UK. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1(2), 1–11. http://doi.org/10.5334/jime.394
• Rienties, B. ve Jones, A., (2019). Evidence-Based Learning: Futures. Using learning design and learning analytics to empower teachers to meet students’ diverse needs. In: F., Rebecca, J., Ann, & S., Eileen (eds.) Educational Visions: The lessons from 40 years of innovation. London: Ubiquity Press, pp. 109–125. https://doi.org/10.5334/bcg.g
• Rienties, B. ve Toetenel, L. (2016). The impact of learning design on student behaviour, satisfaction and performance: A cross-institutional comparison across 151 modules. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 333–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.074
• Sharif, A. ve Cho, S. (2015). 21st-Century instructional designers: Bridging the perceptual gaps between identity, practice, impact and professional development. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 12(3), 72. http://dx.doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v12i3.2176
• Siemens, G. (2013). Learning analytics: The emergence of a discipline. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1380-1400. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0002764213498851
• Somyürek, S., Güyer, T., Atasoy, B. ve Ünal, M., (2021). E‐öğrenme ortamları ve öğrenme analitikleri. Bilişim Teknolojileri Dergisi, 14(3), 327‐336. https://doi.org/10.17671/gazibtd.709798
• Şahin, M. ve Yurdugül, H. (2020). Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics: Past, Present and Future. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 9(1), 121-131. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.606077
• Uysal, M., Horzum, M. B. ve Duman, İ. (2019, June). Öz-düzenleyici Öğrenme ve Öğrenme Analitiklerinin Kesişimi: Alanyazın İncelemesi. In BOOK OF PROCEEDINGS (p. 172). http://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.298393
• Viberg, O., Khalil, M. ve Baars, M. (2020, March). Self-regulated learning and learning analytics in online learning environments: A review of empirical research. In Proceedings of the tenth international conference on learning analytics & knowledge (pp. 524-533). https://doi.org/10.1145/3375462.3375483
• Wong, J., Baars, M., de Koning, B. B., van der Zee, T., Davis, D., Khalil, M., ... ve Paas, F. (2019). Educational theories and learning analytics: From data to knowledge. In Utilizing learning analytics to support study success (pp. 3-25). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64792-0_1
• Yılmaz, K. Y. (2021). Sosyal bilimlerde ve eğitim bilimlerinde sistematik derleme, meta değerlendirme ve bibliyometrik analizler. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10(2), 1457-1490.