1.
The Impact of Learning Analytics
on the Dutch Education System
Hendrik Drachsler, Slavi Stoyanov, Marcus Specht

2.
27/03/14
Hendrik Drachsler 2 2 / 31

3.
Onderwerp via >Beeld >Koptekst en voettekst
Pagina 3
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 3 / 31

4.
• 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)
27 March 2014@HDrachsler
What is Group Concept Mapping?
4 / 31

5.
• 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
...organize the
issues...
Work
quickly and
effectively
under
pressure
49
Organize the
work when
directions are
not specific.
39
Decide how to
manage
multiple tasks.
20 Manage resources effectively.
4
2. Sort
3. Rate
1. Brainstorm
What is Group Concept Mapping?
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 5 / 31

6.
Binary, square
similarity
matrix
Sort for one participant
Total square
similarity
matrix across
participants
What is Group Concept Mapping?
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 6 / 31

7.
Multidimensional Scaling
Output: An 2-dimensional
mapping of the entities
5655
54
53
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
40
39
38
37 36
35
34
33
32
31
3029
28
27
26
25
242322
21
20 19
181716
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
1
Input: A square matrix of
relationships among a set
of entities
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
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 7 / 31

8.
Hierarchical Cluster Analysis
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))
1 6 8 3 4 7 5 9 10 2
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
NumberofClusters
Merge Points Merged
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
6
8
7
5
9
10
2
4
3
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 8 / 31

9.
Online brainstorming
Onderwerp via >Beeld >Koptekst en voettekst
Pagina 9
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 9 / 31

10.
Online sorting
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 10 / 31

11.
Online rating
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 11 / 31

12.
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.
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 12 / 31

13.
Descriptive Statistics
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 13 / 31

14.
Descriptive Statistics
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 14 / 31

15.
Descriptive Statistics
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 15 / 31

16.
Descriptive Statistics
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 16 / 31

17.
Descriptive Statistics
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 17 / 31

18.
Point Map
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1718
19
20
21
22
23
24 25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
3536
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48 49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
6869
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 18 / 31

19.
Cluster Map points
1
5
9
20 3337
42
46
47
48
50
51
54
55 59
62
64
7174
84
89
97
101
106
1623 2527
3536
49
63
67
72
80
2
1018
26
29
53
6869
76 78
79
82 87
103
105
3
13
17
22 57
70
75
94
95
100
4
6
19
28
38
40
41
44
6165
73
83
91
92
102
104
7
15
24
31
39
43
58
81
86
96
98
107
108
8
11
1214
21
30
32
34
45
5256
60
66 77
85
88
90
93
99
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 19 / 31

20.
Cluster Map 7 labeled
1. Students empowerment
2. Personalisation
3. Research
& Learning Design
4. Teacher
empowerment
5. Feedback
& Performance
6. Risks
7. Management
& Economics
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 20 / 31

21.
Cluster Rating Map Importance
1. Students empowerment
2. Personalisation
3. Research
& Learning Design
4. Teacher
empowerment
5. Feedback & Performance
6. Risks
7. Management & Economics
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
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 21 / 31

22.
Cluster Rating Map Feasibility
1. Students
empowerment
2. Personalisation
3. Research
& Learning Design
4. Teacher
empowerment
5. Feedback
& Performance
6. Risks
7. Management
& Economics
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
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 22 / 31

23.
H1: The most important items (clusters) will be less
feasible to implement in the Dutch education system.
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 23 / 31

24.
Pattern Match Importance vs. Feasibility
Importance Feasibility
Teacher empowerment Teacher empowerment
Personalisation
Personalisation
Feedback & Performance
Feedback & Performance
Research & Learning Design
Research & Learning Design
Students empowerment
Students empowerment
Management & Economics Management & Economics
Risks Risks
2.75 2.91
4.00 3.83
r = 0.94
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 24 / 31

25.
H2: There will be a significant difference between Novice
participants compared to more Expert participants on their
rating for Importance and Feasibility.
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 25 / 31

26.
Pattern Match Novice vs. Experts on Importance
Novice Expert
Personalisation
PersonalisationTeacher empowerment
Teacher empowerment
Feedback & Performance Feedback & Performance
Students empowerment
Students empowermentResearch & Learning Design
Research & Learning Design
Management & Economics
Management & Economics
Risks Risks
2.79 2.70
4.05 3.99
r = 0.99
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 26 / 31

27.
Pattern Match Novice vs. Experts on Feasibility
Novice Experts
Teacher empowerment Teacher empowerment
Research & Learning Design
Research & Learning DesignPersonalisation
PersonalisationFeedback & Performance
Feedback & Performance
Students empowerment
Students empowerment
Management & Economics Management & Economics
Risks Risks
2.96 2.88
3.67 3.97
r = 0.99
27 March 2014@HDrachsler 27 / 31

28.
Conclusions
27 March 2014@HDrachsler
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.
Conclusions
NL is ready to roll out LA in
K12 & Higher Education
28 / 31

29.
Conclusions
27 March 2014@HDrachsler
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!
29 / 31

30.
bit.ly/LAK14
30 / 3127 March 2014@HDrachsler

31.
31 / 3127 March 2014@HDrachsler