↓ Skip to main content

Student Attitudes toward Learning Analytics in Higher Education: “The Fitbit Version of the Learning World”

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
249 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Student Attitudes toward Learning Analytics in Higher Education: “The Fitbit Version of the Learning World”
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01959
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lynne D. Roberts, Joel A. Howell, Kristen Seaman, David C. Gibson

Abstract

Increasingly, higher education institutions are exploring the potential of learning analytics to predict student retention, understand learning behaviors, and improve student learning through providing personalized feedback and support. The technical development of learning analytics has outpaced consideration of ethical issues surrounding their use. Of particular concern is the absence of the student voice in decision-making about learning analytics. We explored higher education students' knowledge, attitudes, and concerns about big data and learning analytics through four focus groups (N = 41). Thematic analysis of the focus group transcripts identified six key themes. The first theme, "Uninformed and Uncertain," represents students' lack of knowledge about learning analytics prior to the focus groups. Following the provision of information, viewing of videos and discussion of learning analytics scenarios three further themes; "Help or Hindrance to Learning," "More than a Number," and "Impeding Independence"; represented students' perceptions of the likely impact of learning analytics on their learning. "Driving Inequality" and "Where Will it Stop?" represent ethical concerns raised by the students about the potential for inequity, bias and invasion of privacy and the need for informed consent. A key tension to emerge was how "personal" vs. "collective" purposes or principles can intersect with "uniform" vs. "autonomous" activity. The findings highlight the need the need to engage students in the decision making process about learning analytics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 249 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Unknown 247 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 13%
Student > Master 30 12%
Researcher 27 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 6%
Other 13 5%
Other 69 28%
Unknown 62 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 58 23%
Computer Science 46 18%
Psychology 17 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 15 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 3%
Other 32 13%
Unknown 73 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 March 2020.
All research outputs
#4,628,723
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,576
of 30,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,761
of 420,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#139
of 406 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,063 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,355 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 406 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.