skip to main content
10.1145/2090116.2090118acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageslakConference Proceedingsconference-collections
keynote

Attention please!: learning analytics for visualization and recommendation

Published:27 February 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper will present the general goal of and inspiration for our work on learning analytics, that relies on attention metadata for visualization and recommendation. Through information visualization techniques, we can provide a dashboard for learners and teachers, so that they no longer need to "drive blind". Moreover, recommendation can help to deal with the "paradox of choice" and turn abundance from a problem into an asset for learning.

References

  1. C. Anderson. The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete. Wired Magazine, 16(7), 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. G. Bell and J. Gemmel. Your life, uploaded. Plume, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. J. Biehl, M. Czerwinski, G. Smith, and G. Robertson. FASTDash: a visual dashboard for fostering awareness in software teams. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 1313--1322. ACM, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. D. Boyd. Facebook's Privacy Trainwreck: Exposure, Invasion, and Social Convergence. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14(1):13--20, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. C.-H. Chang, M. Kayed, M. R. Girgis, and K. F. Shaalan. A Survey of Web Information Extraction Systems. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 18:1411--1428, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. N. Corthaut, S. Lippens, S. Govaerts, E. Duval, and J.-P. Martens. The integration of a metadata generation framework in a music annotation workflow. Oct. 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. A. Croll and S. Power. Complete Web Monitoring. O'Reilly Media, Inc., 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. E. Duval and K. Verbert. On the role of technical standards for learning technologies. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 1(4):229--234, Oct. 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. J. Fry, R. Schroeder, and M. den Besten. Open science in e-science: contingency or policy? JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, 65(1):6--32, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. M. H. Goldhaber. The Attention Economy and the Net. First Monday, 2(4), Apr. 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. S. Govaerts, S. E. Helou, E. Duval, and D. Gillet. A Federated Search and Social Recommendation Widget. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Social Recommender Systems (SRS 2011) in conjunction with the 2011 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 2011), pages 1--8, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. S. Govaerts, K. Verbert, D. Dahrendorf, C. Ullrich, S. Manuel, M. Werkle, A. Chatterjee, A. Nussbaumer, D. Renzel, M. Scheffel, M. Friedrich, J. L. Santos, E. Duval, and E. L.-c. Law. Towards Responsive Open Learning Environments: the ROLE Interoperability Framework. In ECTEL11: European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. S. Govaerts, K. Verbert, J. Klerkx, and E. Duval. Visualizing Activities for Self-reflection and Awareness. In Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Web-based Learning, pages 91--100. Springer, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. T. Hey and A. E. Trefethen. Cyberinfrastructure for e-Science. Science, 308(5723):817--821, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. U. Kirschenmann, M. Scheffel, M. Friedrich, K. Niemann, and M. Wolpers. Demands of Modern PLEs and the ROLE Approach. In M. Wolpers, P. Kirschner, M. Scheffel, S. Lindstaedt, and V. Dimitrova, editors, Sustaining TEL: From Innovation to Learning and Practice, volume 6383 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 167--182. Springer, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. X. Ma, G. Chen, and J. Xiao. Analysis of An Online Health Social Network. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM International Health Informatics Symposium, pages 297--306. ACM, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. N. Manouselis, H. Drachsler, R. Vuorikari, H. Hummel, and R. Koper. Recommender Systems in Technology Enhanced Learning. In F. Ricci, L. Rokach, B. Shapira, and P. B. Kantor, editors, Recommender Systems Handbook, pages 387--415. Springer US, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. M. McKeon. Harnessing the web information ecosystem with wiki-based visualization dashboards. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 15(6):1081--8, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. J. Najjar, M. Wolpers, and E. Duval. Contextualized attention metadata. D-Lib Magazine, 13(9/10), Sept. 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. X. Ochoa and E. Duval. Use of contextualized attention metadata for ranking and recommending learning objects. In CAMA06: Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on Contextualized attention metadata: collecting, managing and exploiting of rich usage information, pages 9--16, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. H. Põldoja. EduFeedr-following and supporting learners in open blog-based courses. In Proceedings of OpenEd2010, number 2010. Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. E. Pariser. The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Penguin Press, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. K. Popper. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge, 1959.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. A. S. Rath, D. Devaurs, and S. Lindstaedt. UICO: an ontology-based user interaction context model for automatic task detection on the computer desktop. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Context, Information and Ontologies, CIAO '09, pages 8:1--8:10, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. C. Romero and S. Ventura. Educational data mining: A survey from 1995 to 2005. Expert Systems with Applications, 33(1):135--146, July 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. S. S. Sahoo, A. Sheth, and C. Henson. Semantic provenance for eScience - Managing the deluge of scientific data. IEEE INTERNET COMPUTING, 12(4):46--54, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. J. L. Santos, K. Verbert, S. Govaerts, and E. Duval. Visualizing PLE Usage. In Proceedings of EFEPLE11: 1st Workshop on Exploring the Fitness and Evolvability of Personal Learning Environments. CEUR workshop proceedings, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. H. Schmitz, M. Scheffel, M. Friedrich, M. Jahn, K. Niemann, and M. Wolpers. CAMera for PLE. In U. Cress, V. Dimitrova, and M. Specht, editors, Learning in the Synergy of Multiple Disciplines, volume 5794 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 507--520. Springer, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. B. Schwartz. The paradox of choice - Why more is less. HarperCollins, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. C. Shirky. Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations. Penguin Press, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. E. Singer. The Measured Life. Technology Review, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. M. Swan. Emerging patient-driven health care models: an examination of health social networks, consumer personalized medicine and quantified self-tracking. International journal of environmental research and public health, 6(2):492--525, Feb. 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. S. Ternier, K. Verbert, G. Parra, B. Vandeputte, J. Klerkx, E. Duval, V. Ordonez, and X. Ochoa. The Ariadne Infrastructure for Managing and Storing Metadata. IEEE Internet Computing, 13(4):18--25, July 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. K. Verbert, E. Duval, H. Drachsler, N. Manouselis, M. Wolpers, R. Vuorikari, and G. Beham. Dataset-driven Research for Improving TEL Recommender Systems. In 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, Banff, Canada, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. M. Wolpers, J. Najjar, and E. Duval. Workshop report on the international {ACM} workshop on contextualized attention metadata: collecting, managing and exploiting rich usage information (cama 2006), June 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. M. Wolpers, J. Najjar, K. Verbert, and E. Duval. Tracking actual usage: the attention metadata approach. Educational Technology and Society, 10(3):106--121, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Attention please!: learning analytics for visualization and recommendation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      LAK '11: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge
      February 2011
      195 pages
      ISBN:9781450309448
      DOI:10.1145/2090116

      Copyright © 2011 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 27 February 2011

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • keynote

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate236of782submissions,30%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader