Comparison of Example 4 and 5 from Cooper (2012), A framework of characteristics for analytics
|Example 4 Research Librarianship Social Network Analysis||Example 5 SNAPP Social Network Adapting Pedagogical Practice.|
|Analysis, Data Origin and Orientation||Analysis subject
|Journals, articles, authors
not clearly defined
|Learners and teachers
|Data Origin||Thomas Reuters Social Sciences Citation Index.
|Private from LMS
Processing at teacher level
|Objectives||Not clear – deeper insights into discipline of research librarianship||Performance|
|Technical Approach||Descriptive approach to Social Network Analysis is used||Descriptive approach to Social Network Analysis – strong bias toward visualisation.|
|Embedded theories and reality||Theories of social communication and community development||Supports socio-constructivist practice|
|Comment||Research question posed and conclusions drawn are informative rather than being action-oriented.||SNAPP stronger example of analytics. Intention towards actionable insights is different. But guard against SNAPP being used as the single lens on the effect of changing learning activity design.|
This paper provided a general framework for a starting point for using learning analytics. Provided some examples of analytic tools and their use.
SAS – Statistical Analytics Software – student retention analysis
IBM programmes used in example 2 and 3 – attendance and Green ICT at Defra
Example 4 used statistical data from Thomas Reuters Social Sciences Citation Index which is a subscription service – Research librarianship social network analysis
SNAPP – Social Network Adapting Pedagogical Practice – visualisations of user interaction before and after interventions.
Cooper, A. (2012) ‘A framework of characteristics for analytics’, CETIS Analytics Series, vol. 1 no. 7, Bolton, JISC CETIS; also available online at http://publications.cetis.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/A-Framework-of-Characteristics-for-Analytics-Vol1-No7.pdf (accessed on 31 July 2016).