Author:
Prinsloo Paul,Khalil Mohammad,Slade Sharon
Abstract
AbstractCentral to the institutionalization of learning analytics is the need to understand and improve student learning. Frameworks guiding the implementation of learning analytics flow from and perpetuate specific understandings of learning. Crucially, they also provide insights into how learning analytics acknowledges and positions itself as entangled in institutional data ecosystems, and (increasingly) as part of a data ecology driven by a variety of data interests. The success of learning analytics should therefore be understood in terms of data flows and data interests informing the emerging and mutually constitutive interrelationships and interdependencies between different stakeholders, interests and power relations. This article analyses several selected frameworks to determine the extent to which learning analytics understands itself as adata ecosystemwith dynamic interdependencies and interrelationships (human and non-human). Secondly, as learning analytics increasingly becomes part of broaderdata ecologies, we examine the extent to which learning analytics takes cognizance of the reality, the potential and the risks of being part of a broader data ecology. Finally, this article examines thedifferent data interestsvested in learning analytics and critically considers implications for student data sovereignty. The research found that most of the analyzed frameworks understand learning analytics as a data ecosystem, with very little evidence of a broader data ecological understanding. The vast majority of analyzed frameworks consider student data as valuable resource without considering student data ownership and their data rights for self-determination.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Education,General Computer Science
Reference82 articles.
1. Archer, E., & Prinsloo, P. (2020). Speaking the unspoken in learning analytics: Troubling the defaults. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 45(6), 888–900.
2. Assarroudi, A., Heshmati Nabavi, F., Armat, M. R., Ebadi, A., & Vaismoradi, M. (2018). Directed qualitative content analysis: The description and elaboration of its underpinning methods and data analysis process. Journal of Research in Nursing, 23(1), 42–55.
3. Baker, K. S., & Bowker, G. C. (2007). Information ecology: Open system environment for data, memories, and knowing. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 29, 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10844-006-0035-7
4. Beer, D. (2019). The data gaze. Sage.
5. Blok, A., Marquet, C., Courmont, A., Minor, K., Young, M., Hoyng, R., & Nold, C. (2017). Data platforms and cities. Tecnoscienza. Italian Journal of Science & Technology Studies, 8(2), 183–190.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献