Skip to main content

EDUCAUSE: Learning analytics and business intelligence

Learning analytics and business intelligence were major themes at this year’s EDUCAUSE conference. I attended a couple of sessions to see how other institutions are using these technologies and to learn more about these areas for myself. Our learning technologists are all engaged with these ideas but I personally didn’t know much about it so this was a good opportunity to learn something about it.

John Doove gave a very interesting overview of several small projects funded by SURF, the Dutch equivalent of JISC. These were deliberately experimental, aimed at bringing people together to see what they could do. The results were both varied and neat and will form the basis for further work. This gave me a good overview of the sort of issues that learning analytics can investigate:

  • Project 1 gained insight in the use of Learning objects (e.g. short instructional videos), showing that use of certain materials correlated to successful student outcomes.
  • Project 2 compared course evaluation by students with student performance data.
  • Project 3 researched how students used the LMS. They found that short student sessions corresponded to the successful students, which goes against the evidence from other experiments. So they investigated this and found problems in the UI were holding up some students and interfering with their learning.
  • Project 4 investigated when to roll out a component of the LMS tool in use that everyone already bought but doesn’t use.
  • Project 5 used text mining of student notes in digital textbooks. E.g repeated occurrence of the word “understand” could indicate students not understanding a certain area.
  • Project 6 prototyped a dashboard for students, showing online behaviour in Blackboard.
  • Project 7 investigated learning paths through the curriculum and how these affect student performance. Now developing into a recommender service for students.

The other learning analytics presentation was on an altogether different scale. Three institutions collaborated to build an aggregated data set, containing over 600,000 student-level records, that they could use to analyse and compare outcomes. The talk didn’t really go into details of what they learnt from the data, focussing more on the process of building the data set in the first place.

On the business intelligence side of things, Henry Childers of the University of Arizona gave a thorough and illuminating presentation about their major BI intiative. He showed the amount of effort that had gone into their system and the organisation they used. Their approach was to start with operational data on an area-by-area basis (e.g. student data, finance, research, estates) and then gradually introduce management data and then aim for strategic data. They have a common data governance group, which sounds similar to our own Applications Architecture Governance Group.

I was particularly interested by one of the lessons Henry listed, that a specification-based approach did not work well for designing reports and that they needed a much more iterative and responsive approach. I think this matches our experience too and we should probably adapt the way we develop reports.

There were many other presentations on these issues, particularly on learning analytics. Reports I heard from other delegates suggested that the quality of presentations was rather mixed, so I’m glad that I found at least one good talk on each topic.


Popular posts from this blog

Why the UCISA Capability Model is useful

What do Universities do?

This may seem a strange question to ask and the answer may seem obvious.  Universities educate students and undertake research.  And perhaps they work with industrial partners and create spin-off companies of their worn.  And they may work with local communities, and affiliation bodies for certain degress, and they definitely report on their activities to government bodies such as HEFCE.  They provide student services and support.  The longeryou think about it, the more things you can think of that a University does.

In business, the things that an organisation does are called "capabilities", which is a slightly strange term.  I think it is linked to the HR idea of a combination of the CAPacity and ABILITY to do a task.  Whatever the name, it is a useful concept.  A capability is more basic than a process: a University may change the way it educates students but as long as it remains a University it will educate them one way or another.

A capability …

"No more us & them"

WonkHE recently posted an interesting opinion piece with the title Academics and Administrators: No more ‘us and them’. In that post, Paul Greatrix rebutted criticisms of professional services (administrative) staff in Universites from some academics. To illustrate his point, he quoted recent articles in which administrators were portrayed as a useless overhead on the key tasks at hand (teaching and research).

This flows both ways, as Greatrix himself points out. As Enterprise Architect, I work with Professional Services colleagues and I have heard some of them express opinions that clearly fail to understand the nature of academic work. Academics cannot be treated as if they were factory workers, churning out lectures on a treadmill.

I think these comments reveal a fundamental clash of ideas about how a University should work. Some people who come into management positions for other sectors tend to frame the University as a business, with students and research funders as customers t…

Changing Principles

In EA, architecture principles set a framework for making architectural decisions.  They help to establish a common understanding across different groups of stakeholders, and provide guidance for portfolios and projects.  Michael Durso of the LSE gave a good introduction to the idea in a webinar last week for the UCISA EA community.

Many organisations take the TOGAF architecture principles as a starting point.  These are based on the four architectural domains of TOGAF: business, information/data, applications, technology/infrastructure.  These principles tend to describe what should be done, e.g. re-use applications, buy in software rather than build it, keep data secure.  See for example the principles adopted at Plymouth University and the University of Birmingham.

Recently though, I encountered a different way of looking at principles.  The user experience design community tend to focus more on how we should do things.  E.g. we should start with user needs, use iterative developm…