The Impact of Learning Analytics on the Dutch ... - Semantic Scholar
The Impact of Learning Analytics on the Dutch Education System Hendrik Drachsler, Slavi Stoyanov, Marcus Specht
18 December 2014
Hendrik Drachsler
2 2 / 31
Onderwerp via >Beeld >Koptekst en voettekst Pagina 3
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
3 / 31
What is Group Concept Mapping? • Structured approach to objectively identify the common understanding of a group of experts about a particular issue • Involves participants in 3 simple activities (1. brainstorming, 2. sorting and 3. rating of ideas) • Applies a robust analysis (Multi Dimensional Scaling (MDS) and Hierarchical Clustering Analysis (HCA)). • GCM presents the results from the analysis as conceptual maps and other graphical representations (pattern matches and go-zones)
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
4 / 31
What is Group Concept Mapping? • innovations in way network is delivered • (investigate) corporate/structural alignment • assist in the development of non-traditional partnerships (Rehab with the Medicine Community) • expand investigation and knowledge of PSN'S/PSO's • continue STHCS sponsored forums on public health issues (medicine managed care forum) • inventory assets of all participating agencies (providers, Venn Diagrams) • access additional funds for telemedicine expansion • better utilization of current technological bridge • continued support by STHCS to member facilities • expand and encourage utilization of interface programs to strengthen the viability and to improve the health care delivery system (ie teleconference) • discussion with CCHN
1. Brainstorm
2. Sort Decide how to manage multiple tasks. 20
Manage resources effectively. 4
Work quickly and effectively under pressure 49 Organize the work when directions are not specific. 39
...organize the issues...
3. Rate @HDrachsler
27 March 2014
5 / 31
What is Group Concept Mapping? Sort for one participant
Binary, square similarity matrix
Total square similarity matrix across participants
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
6 / 31
Multidimensional Scaling 5 1 2 4 0 1 1 3 1 0
1 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0
2 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 5 0 0 2 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 4 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 0 0
1 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 5 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Input: A square matrix of relationships among a set of entities
13
3
17
16
22
43
24
23
12
50
25
18
38 26 52
8 44
6
36
37
27
41 29
30
34 7
35 51
47
31
42 10
Output: An 2-dimensional mapping of the entities
54
45
28
33
32
14 39 4
1 40
49 20
55
48 15
21
11 56
19 53
@HDrachsler
46
9
5
27 March 2014
7 / 31
Hierarchical Cluster Analysis 7 5
8 1
9 10
6 2 3 4
Merge Points Merged 1+6 5+7 9 + 10 (1 + 6) + 8 3+4 2 + (9 + 10) ((1 + 6) + 8)) + (3 + 4) (5 + 7) + ((2 + (9 + 10)) (((1 + 6) + 8)) + (3 + 4)) + (5 + 7) + ((2 + (9 + 10))
Number of Clusters
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1
6
8
3
4
7
5
9
10
2
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
8 / 31
Online brainstorming
Onderwerp via >Beeld >Koptekst en voettekst Pagina 9
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
9 / 31
Online sorting
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
10 / 31
Online rating
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
11 / 31
Hypothesis H1: The most important items (clusters) will be less feasible to implement in the Dutch education system.
H2: There will be a significant difference between Novice participants compared to more Expert participants on their rating for Importance and Feasibility.
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
12 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
13 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
14 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
15 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
16 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
17 / 31
Point Map 2
79 82
8 21 11 66 90 56
76 77
26 87 18
29 6869 53 78
107 31 58 39 98
13 75 70 394
28
17
104
41
52
32 88
44
73 65
12
6
4 19
83
61 102
38
60
93 30
22 57
105 10
45 14
95
34
99
85
100
103
40
91
63
92
86
36 35
96 72
97 48
24 15 108 7 43
81
54
64
4923 16 80
2725 67
84 9 59 37 33 55 51 42 7420 71 5 106 50 47 89 101
62 1 46
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
18 / 31
Cluster Map points 2
79 82
8 21 11 66 90 56
76 77
26 87 18
29 6869
52
53 78
30 107 31 58 39 98
28
17
104
41
32 88
44
73 65
12
6
4 19
83
61 102
38
60
93
22 57 13 75 70 394
105 10
45 14
95
34
99
85
100
103
40
91
63
92
86
36 35
96 72
97 48
24 15 108 7 43
81
54
64
4923 16 80
2725 67
84 9 59 37 33 55 20 51 42 74 71 5 106 50 47 89 101
62 1 46
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
19 / 31
Cluster Map 7 labeled 4. Teacher 3. Research empowerment & Learning Design
7. Management & Economics
5. Feedback & Performance
2. Personalisation 6. Risks 1. Students empowerment
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
20 / 31
Cluster Rating Map Importance 3. Research & Learning Design
Cluster Legend Layer Value 1 2.75 to 3.00 2 3.00 to 3.25 3 3.25 to 3.50 4 3.50 to 3.75 5 3.75 to 4.00
4. Teacher empowerment
5. Feedback & Performance 7. Management & Economics
2. Personalisation 6. Risks 1. Students empowerment
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
21 / 31
Cluster Rating Map Feasibility Cluster Legend Layer Value 1 2.91 to 3.10 2 3.10 to 3.28 3 3.28 to 3.46 4 3.46 to 3.64 5 3.64 to 3.83
3. Research & Learning Design
4. Teacher empowerment
5. Feedback & Performance
7. Management & Economics
2. Personalisation 6. Risks
1. Students empowerment
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
22 / 31
H1: The most important items (clusters) will be less feasible to implement in the Dutch education system.
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
23 / 31
Pattern Match Importance vs. Feasibility Importance
4.00
3.83
Teacher empowerment
Feasibility Teacher empowerment
Personalisation Feedback & Performance
Research & Learning Design
Research & Learning Design
Personalisation
Students empowerment
Feedback & Performance
Students empowerment
Management & Economics
Management & Economics
Risks
Risks 2.75
r = 0.94
@HDrachsler
2.91
27 March 2014
24 / 31
H2: There will be a significant difference between Novice participants compared to more Expert participants on their rating for Importance and Feasibility.
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
25 / 31
Pattern Match Novice vs. Experts on Importance Novice
4.05
3.99
Personalisation
Expert Teacher empowerment
Teacher empowerment
Personalisation
Feedback & Performance
Feedback & Performance
Students empowerment
Research & Learning Design
Research & Learning Design
Students empowerment
Management & Economics
Management & Economics Risks
Risks 2.79
r = 0.99
@HDrachsler
2.70
27 March 2014
26 / 31
Pattern Match Novice vs. Experts on Feasibility Novice
3.67
3.97
Teacher empowerment
Experts Teacher empowerment
Research & Learning Design Research & Learning Design
Personalisation Feedback & Performance
Personalisation Feedback & Performance
Students empowerment Students empowerment
Management & Economics
Management & Economics Risks
Risks 2.96
r = 0.99
@HDrachsler
2.88
27 March 2014
27 / 31
Conclusions Conclusions We rejected H1 and H2, the GCM study shows a very high agreement between the Novice and Expert participants on how Important and Feasible are changes that LA brings to the Dutch education. The Dutch community highly agrees on topics that are of importance to influence the educational system with LA.
NL is ready to roll out LA in K12 & Higher Education
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
28 / 31
Conclusions Future Research H3: There will be a significant difference between the stakeholder groups (Higher Education vs. K12), (Business vs. Educational Sector) Find partners that are interested to run a GCM on LA in their countries - Contact us!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
29 / 31
bit.ly/LAK14
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
30 / 31
Many thanks for your attention! This silde is available at: http://www.slideshare.com/Drachsler Email:
[email protected]
Skype:
celstec-hendrik.drachsler
Blogging at: http://www.drachsler.de Twittering at: http://twitter.com/HDrachsler
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
31 / 31
18 December 2014
Hendrik Drachsler
2 2 / 31
Onderwerp via >Beeld >Koptekst en voettekst Pagina 3
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
3 / 31
What is Group Concept Mapping? • Structured approach to objectively identify the common understanding of a group of experts about a particular issue • Involves participants in 3 simple activities (1. brainstorming, 2. sorting and 3. rating of ideas) • Applies a robust analysis (Multi Dimensional Scaling (MDS) and Hierarchical Clustering Analysis (HCA)). • GCM presents the results from the analysis as conceptual maps and other graphical representations (pattern matches and go-zones)
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
4 / 31
What is Group Concept Mapping? • innovations in way network is delivered • (investigate) corporate/structural alignment • assist in the development of non-traditional partnerships (Rehab with the Medicine Community) • expand investigation and knowledge of PSN'S/PSO's • continue STHCS sponsored forums on public health issues (medicine managed care forum) • inventory assets of all participating agencies (providers, Venn Diagrams) • access additional funds for telemedicine expansion • better utilization of current technological bridge • continued support by STHCS to member facilities • expand and encourage utilization of interface programs to strengthen the viability and to improve the health care delivery system (ie teleconference) • discussion with CCHN
1. Brainstorm
2. Sort Decide how to manage multiple tasks. 20
Manage resources effectively. 4
Work quickly and effectively under pressure 49 Organize the work when directions are not specific. 39
...organize the issues...
3. Rate @HDrachsler
27 March 2014
5 / 31
What is Group Concept Mapping? Sort for one participant
Binary, square similarity matrix
Total square similarity matrix across participants
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
6 / 31
Multidimensional Scaling 5 1 2 4 0 1 1 3 1 0
1 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0
2 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 5 0 0 2 0 0
1 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 4 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 2 0 0 5 0 0
1 2 0 0 0 4 0 0 5 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Input: A square matrix of relationships among a set of entities
13
3
17
16
22
43
24
23
12
50
25
18
38 26 52
8 44
6
36
37
27
41 29
30
34 7
35 51
47
31
42 10
Output: An 2-dimensional mapping of the entities
54
45
28
33
32
14 39 4
1 40
49 20
55
48 15
21
11 56
19 53
@HDrachsler
46
9
5
27 March 2014
7 / 31
Hierarchical Cluster Analysis 7 5
8 1
9 10
6 2 3 4
Merge Points Merged 1+6 5+7 9 + 10 (1 + 6) + 8 3+4 2 + (9 + 10) ((1 + 6) + 8)) + (3 + 4) (5 + 7) + ((2 + (9 + 10)) (((1 + 6) + 8)) + (3 + 4)) + (5 + 7) + ((2 + (9 + 10))
Number of Clusters
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1
6
8
3
4
7
5
9
10
2
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
8 / 31
Online brainstorming
Onderwerp via >Beeld >Koptekst en voettekst Pagina 9
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
9 / 31
Online sorting
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
10 / 31
Online rating
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
11 / 31
Hypothesis H1: The most important items (clusters) will be less feasible to implement in the Dutch education system.
H2: There will be a significant difference between Novice participants compared to more Expert participants on their rating for Importance and Feasibility.
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
12 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
13 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
14 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
15 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
16 / 31
Descriptive Statistics
!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
17 / 31
Point Map 2
79 82
8 21 11 66 90 56
76 77
26 87 18
29 6869 53 78
107 31 58 39 98
13 75 70 394
28
17
104
41
52
32 88
44
73 65
12
6
4 19
83
61 102
38
60
93 30
22 57
105 10
45 14
95
34
99
85
100
103
40
91
63
92
86
36 35
96 72
97 48
24 15 108 7 43
81
54
64
4923 16 80
2725 67
84 9 59 37 33 55 51 42 7420 71 5 106 50 47 89 101
62 1 46
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
18 / 31
Cluster Map points 2
79 82
8 21 11 66 90 56
76 77
26 87 18
29 6869
52
53 78
30 107 31 58 39 98
28
17
104
41
32 88
44
73 65
12
6
4 19
83
61 102
38
60
93
22 57 13 75 70 394
105 10
45 14
95
34
99
85
100
103
40
91
63
92
86
36 35
96 72
97 48
24 15 108 7 43
81
54
64
4923 16 80
2725 67
84 9 59 37 33 55 20 51 42 74 71 5 106 50 47 89 101
62 1 46
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
19 / 31
Cluster Map 7 labeled 4. Teacher 3. Research empowerment & Learning Design
7. Management & Economics
5. Feedback & Performance
2. Personalisation 6. Risks 1. Students empowerment
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
20 / 31
Cluster Rating Map Importance 3. Research & Learning Design
Cluster Legend Layer Value 1 2.75 to 3.00 2 3.00 to 3.25 3 3.25 to 3.50 4 3.50 to 3.75 5 3.75 to 4.00
4. Teacher empowerment
5. Feedback & Performance 7. Management & Economics
2. Personalisation 6. Risks 1. Students empowerment
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
21 / 31
Cluster Rating Map Feasibility Cluster Legend Layer Value 1 2.91 to 3.10 2 3.10 to 3.28 3 3.28 to 3.46 4 3.46 to 3.64 5 3.64 to 3.83
3. Research & Learning Design
4. Teacher empowerment
5. Feedback & Performance
7. Management & Economics
2. Personalisation 6. Risks
1. Students empowerment
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
22 / 31
H1: The most important items (clusters) will be less feasible to implement in the Dutch education system.
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
23 / 31
Pattern Match Importance vs. Feasibility Importance
4.00
3.83
Teacher empowerment
Feasibility Teacher empowerment
Personalisation Feedback & Performance
Research & Learning Design
Research & Learning Design
Personalisation
Students empowerment
Feedback & Performance
Students empowerment
Management & Economics
Management & Economics
Risks
Risks 2.75
r = 0.94
@HDrachsler
2.91
27 March 2014
24 / 31
H2: There will be a significant difference between Novice participants compared to more Expert participants on their rating for Importance and Feasibility.
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
25 / 31
Pattern Match Novice vs. Experts on Importance Novice
4.05
3.99
Personalisation
Expert Teacher empowerment
Teacher empowerment
Personalisation
Feedback & Performance
Feedback & Performance
Students empowerment
Research & Learning Design
Research & Learning Design
Students empowerment
Management & Economics
Management & Economics Risks
Risks 2.79
r = 0.99
@HDrachsler
2.70
27 March 2014
26 / 31
Pattern Match Novice vs. Experts on Feasibility Novice
3.67
3.97
Teacher empowerment
Experts Teacher empowerment
Research & Learning Design Research & Learning Design
Personalisation Feedback & Performance
Personalisation Feedback & Performance
Students empowerment Students empowerment
Management & Economics
Management & Economics Risks
Risks 2.96
r = 0.99
@HDrachsler
2.88
27 March 2014
27 / 31
Conclusions Conclusions We rejected H1 and H2, the GCM study shows a very high agreement between the Novice and Expert participants on how Important and Feasible are changes that LA brings to the Dutch education. The Dutch community highly agrees on topics that are of importance to influence the educational system with LA.
NL is ready to roll out LA in K12 & Higher Education
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
28 / 31
Conclusions Future Research H3: There will be a significant difference between the stakeholder groups (Higher Education vs. K12), (Business vs. Educational Sector) Find partners that are interested to run a GCM on LA in their countries - Contact us!
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
29 / 31
bit.ly/LAK14
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
30 / 31
Many thanks for your attention! This silde is available at: http://www.slideshare.com/Drachsler Email:
[email protected]
Skype:
celstec-hendrik.drachsler
Blogging at: http://www.drachsler.de Twittering at: http://twitter.com/HDrachsler
@HDrachsler
27 March 2014
31 / 31
