Abhinava Barthakur
Vitomir Kovanovic
ABSTRACT
The term Learner Profile has proliferated over the years, and more recently, with the increased advocacy around personalising learning experiences. Learner profiles are at the center of personalised learning, and the characterisation of diversity in classrooms is made possible by profiling learners based on their strengths and weaknesses, backgrounds and other factors influencing learning. In this paper, we discuss three common approaches of profiling learners based on students’ cognitive knowledge, skills and competencies and behavioral patterns, all latter commonly used within Learning Analytics (LA). Although each approach has its strengths and merits, there are also several disadvantages that have impeded adoption at scale. We propose that the broader adoption of learner profiles can benefit from careful combination of the methods and practices of three primary approaches, allowing for scalable implementation of learner profiles across educational systems. In this regard, LA can leverage from other aligned domains to develop valid and rigorous measures of students' learning and propel learner profiles from education research to more mainstream educational practice. LA could provide the scope for monitoring and reporting beyond an individualised context and allow holistic evaluations of progress. There is promise in LA research to leverage the growing momentum surrounding learner profiles and make a substantial impact on the field's core aim - understanding and optimising learning as it occurs.
- Ryan S. Anderton, Tess Evans, and Paola T. Chivers. 2016. Predicting Academic Success of Health Science Students for First Year Anatomy and Physiology. International Journal of Higher Education 5, 1 (January 2016), 250.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Ryan Baker, Albert Corbett, Ido Roll, and Kenneth Koedinger. 2008. Developing a generalisable detector of when students game the system. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 18, 3 (August 2008), 287–314.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ryan Shaun Baker, Albert T Corbett, Kenneth R Koedinger, and Angela Z Wagner. 2004. Off-Task Behavior in the Cognitive Tutor Classroom: When Students “Game the System.”. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems 6, 1 (2004), 8.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Abhinava Barthakur, Srecko Joksimovic, Vitomir Kovanovic, Michael Richey, & Abelardo Pardo, 2022. Assessing the sequencing of learning objectives in a study program using evidence-based practice. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 47, 3. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2064971Google ScholarCross Ref
- Abhinava Barthakur, Srecko Joksimovic, Vitomir Kovanovic, George Siemens, Michael Richey, & Shane Dawson, 2021. Assessing program-level learning strategies in MOOCs, Computer in Human Behavior, 117. https://doi-org.access.library.unisa.edu.au/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106674Google Scholar
- Abhinava Barthakur, Srecko Joksimovic, Vitomir Kovanovic, Zhonghua Zhang, Michael Richey, & Abelardo Pardo, 2022. Measuring leadership development in workplace learning using an automated system. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13218Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joe Bocchi, Jacqueline K. Eastman, and Cathy Owens Swift. 2004. Retaining the Online Learner: Profile of Students in an Online MBA Program and Implications for Teaching Them. Journal of Education for Business 79, 4 (January 2004), 245–253.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert Bodily, Judy Kay, Vincent Aleven, Ioana Jivet, Dan Davis, Franceska Xhakaj, and Katrien Verbert. 2018. Open learner models and learning analytics dashboards: a systematic review. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, ACM, Sydney New South Wales Australia, 41–50.Google ScholarDigital Library
- P L Brusilovskiy. 1994. The Construction and Application of Student Models in Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Journal of Computer and Systems Sciences International 32, 1 (1994), 70–89.Google Scholar
- Susan Bull. 2004. Supporting learning with open learner models.Google Scholar
- Susan Bull and Judy Kay. 2010. Open Learner Models. In Advances in Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Roger Nkambou, Jacqueline Bourdeau and Riichiro Mizoguchi (eds.). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 301–322.Google Scholar
- Kate Bullock. 2011. International Baccalaureate learner profile: Literature review. Retrieved September 20, 2022 from https://www.ibo.org/globalassets/new-structure/research/pdfs/iblearnerprofileeng.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Samuel Kai Wah Chu, Rebecca B. Reynolds, Nicole J. Tavares, Michele Notari, and Celina Wing Yi Lee. 2017. 21st Century Skills Development Through Inquiry-Based Learning. Springer International Publishing, Singapore.Google Scholar
- Review Blinded, Blinded for Review, (2019)Google Scholar
- Review Blinded, Blinded for Review, (2014)Google Scholar
- Michel C. Desmarais and Ryan S. J. d. Baker. 2012. A review of recent advances in learner and skill modeling in intelligent learning environments. User Model User-Adap Inter 22, 1–2 (April 2012), 9–38.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Emlyn Dodd, Sarah Ellis, and Sonal Singh. 2020. Making the invisible, visible: a twenty-first century approach to tertiary preparation, attainment and access for student equity. International Journal of Inclusive Education 0, 0 (October 2020), 1–21.Google Scholar
- Dragan Gasevic, Jelena Jovanovic, Abelardo Pardo, and Shane Dawson. 2017. Detecting learning strategies with analytics: Links with self-reported measures and academic performance. Journal of Learning Analytics 4, 2 (2017), 113–128.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David Gonski, Terrey Arcus, Ken Boston, Valerie Gould, Wendy Johnson, Lisa O, Brien, Lee-Anne Perry, and Michael Roberts. 2018. Through Growth to Achievement: Report of the Review to Achieve Educational Excellence in Australian Schools.Google Scholar
- Laura Icela González-Pérez and María Soledad Ramírez-Montoya. 2022. Components of Education 4.0 in 21st Century Skills Frameworks: Systematic Review. Sustainability 14, 3 (January 2022), 1493.Google Scholar
- Arthur C. Graesser, Xiangen Hu, and Robert Sottilare. 2018. Intelligent Tutoring Systems. In International Handbook of the Learning Sciences. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Geraldine Gray and Yoav Bergner. 2022. A Practitioner's Guide to Measurement in Learning Analytics - Decisions, Opportunities, and Challenges. In C. Lang, G. Siemens, A. Friend Wise, D. Gasevic, & A. Merceron (Eds.). In Handbook of Learning Analytics (2nd). Vancouver, BC: SoLAR, 20–28.Google Scholar
- Elisabeth Barratt Hacking, Chloe Blackmore, Kate Bullock, Tristan Bunnell, Michael Donnelly, and Susan Martin. 2018. International Mindedness in Practice: The Evidence from International Baccalaureate Schools. Journal of Research in Internatl Education 17, 1 (April 2018), 3–16.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sandeep M. Jayaprakash, Erik W. Moody, Eitel J. M. Lauría, James R. Regan, and Joshua D. Baron. 2014. Early Alert of Academically At-Risk Students: An Open Source Analytics Initiative. Journal of Learning Analytics 1, 1 (May 2014), 6–47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Srecko Joksimovic, Vitomir Kovanovic, and Shane Dawson. 2019. The Journey of Learning Analytics. HERDSA Review of Higher Education 6, (January 2019), 37–63.Google Scholar
- Kam Cheong Li and Billy Tak-Ming Wong. 2021. Features and trends of personalised learning: a review of journal publications from 2001 to 2018. Interactive Learning Environments 29, 2 (February 2021), 182–195.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Geoff N. Masters. 2014. Towards a growth mindset in assessment. Practically Primary 19, 2 (2014), 4–7.Google Scholar
- Wannisa Matcha, Dragan Gašević, Nora'ayu Ahmad Uzir, Jelena Jovanović, Abelardo Pardo, Lisa Lim, Jorge Maldonado-Mahauad, Sheridan Gentili, Mar Pérez-Sanagustín, and Yi-Shan Tsai. 2020. Analytics of Learning Strategies: Role of Course Design and Delivery Modality. Journal of Learning Analytics 7, 2 (September 2020), 45–71.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wannisa Matcha, Dragan Gašević, Nora'Ayu Ahmad Uzir, Jelena Jovanović, and Abelardo Pardo. 2019. Analytics of Learning Strategies: Associations with Academic Performance and Feedback. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge, ACM, Tempe AZ USA, 461–470.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mühlenbrock and H. U. Hoppe. 1998. A Framework System for Intelligent Support in Open Distributed Learning Environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 9, (1998), 256–274.Google Scholar
- Robin Paul Nagy. 2016. Tracking and Visualising Student Effort: Evolution of a Practical Analytics Tool for Staff and Student Engagement. Journal of Learning Analytics 3, 2 (September 2016), 164–192.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Loc Nguyen and Phung Do. 2008. Learner Model in Adaptive Learning. World Academy of Science Eng. and Technology 45, (2008), 395–400.Google Scholar
- Megan O'Connell, Sandra Milligan, and Tom Bentley. 2019. Beyond ATAR: a proposal for change. Koshland Innovation Fund.Google Scholar
- Alexandros Paramythis and Susanne Loidl-Reisinger. 2003. Adaptive learning environments and e-Learning standards. 369–379.Google Scholar
- Ed de Quincey, Chris Briggs, Theocharis Kyriacou, and Richard Waller. 2019. Student Centred Design of a Learning Analytics System. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge, ACM, Tempe AZ USA, 353–362.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chris Sturgis and Katherine Casey. 2018. Designing for equity: Leveraging Competency-Based Education to Ensure All Students Succeed. iNACOL (2018), 56.Google Scholar
- Carol A. Tomlinson. 2001. How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-ability Classrooms. ASCD.Google Scholar
- Dylan Wiliam. 2007. Once you know what they've learned, what do you do next?? Designing curriculum and assessment for growth. In R. Lissitz (Ed.), Assessing and modeling cognitive development in schools. Maple Grove, MN: JAM Press.Google Scholar
- Philip H. Winne and Allyson F. Hadwin. 1998. Studying as self-regulated learning. In Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ, US, 277–304.Google Scholar
- Andrew Zamecnik, Vitomir Kovanović, Srećko Joksimović, and Lin Liu. 2022. Exploring non-traditional learner motivations and characteristics in online learning: A learner profile study. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence 3, (January 2022), 100051.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Advancing leaner profiles with learning analytics: A scoping review of current trends and challenges
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Personalising learning
Flexible teaching and learning and the 'flipped classroom' are current buzzwords in higher education in Australia and elsewhere in the world. They are reflections of the progressive change in higher education over the last few decades towards more ...
A flipped classroom to personalise learning for engineering students
Flipped classrooms, also known as reversed or inverted classroom, has attracted widespread attention in higher education for active engagement and enhanced learning outcomes. It is proposed in the literature that flipped classroom promotes self-directed ...
Mining learner profile utilizing association rule for web-based learning diagnosis
With the rapid growth of computer and Internet technologies, e-learning has become a major trend in the computer assisted teaching and learning fields. Most past researches for web-based learning focused on the issues of adaptive presentation, adaptive ...
Comments