2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104188
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Linking self-report and process data to performance as measured by different assessment types

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
15
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, drawing a self-regulated learning perspective, Pardo et al, ( 2017 ) found that Australian university students who self-reported having higher intrinsic motivation were also found to view the video course contents more frequently that their peers who reported a lower level of intrinsic motivation. In another study with 320 American high school students, however, Ober et al, ( 2021 ) found that students’ online learning behaviors measured by a number of indicators, including frequencies of their assignment completion and results checking, and the average duration of the computer sessions students produced, were largely uncorrelated with their responses to a learning engagement questionnaire. Clearly further research is required to investigate the extent of consistency between the self-reported and observational measures of students’ learning.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For instance, drawing a self-regulated learning perspective, Pardo et al, ( 2017 ) found that Australian university students who self-reported having higher intrinsic motivation were also found to view the video course contents more frequently that their peers who reported a lower level of intrinsic motivation. In another study with 320 American high school students, however, Ober et al, ( 2021 ) found that students’ online learning behaviors measured by a number of indicators, including frequencies of their assignment completion and results checking, and the average duration of the computer sessions students produced, were largely uncorrelated with their responses to a learning engagement questionnaire. Clearly further research is required to investigate the extent of consistency between the self-reported and observational measures of students’ learning.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another aim of the studies adopting a combined approach is to investigate the extent to which the self-reported and observational measures of students' learning are consistent and aligned with each other (Rodríguez-Triana et al, 2015). Research in this category has examined the relations between the observed online learning behaviors and various self-reported measures involved in students' learning processes, such as self-efficacy and anxiety (Pardo et al, 2017); learning orientations (Han & Ellis, 2021;Han et al, 2020); learning motives (Gašević et al, 2017); learning engagement (Ober, Hong, Rebouças-Ju, Carter, Liu et al, 2021); achievement goal orientations (Sun & Xie, 2020); and effort (Li et al, 2020). However, the research evidence between the self-reported and observational measures has not always been coherent.…”
Section: Relevant Learning Analytics Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, research with this aim has also departed from different learning perspectives and has diverse foci, such as using self-reported questionnaires to assess students' intrinsic motivation, test anxiety, self-efficacy, engagement, effort expenditure, achievement goal, learning orientations and motives on the one hand. On the other hand, a diversity of observed indicators of students' online learning, including frequency of clicks, completion of online learning tasks, duration of online learning events, as well as time-stamped sequences of online learning behaviors have been collected through digital traces to derive students' online learning tactics, strategies, and approaches (Gašević et al, 2017 ; Pardo et al, 2017 ; Han et al, 2020 ; Sun and Xie, 2020 ; Ober et al, 2021 ). However, inconclusive results have been reported among studies with this aim.…”
Section: A Combined Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There have been mixed findings regarding the question of whether factors such as number of log-ins, view counts, or page clicks, in spite of their suggested links with participation, can actually be considered true proxies of engagement. Log-in frequency was linked to engagement with web-based student learning in 1 study [ 22 ], whereas 2 similar studies found no such link [ 23 , 24 ]. In addition, one of these studies [ 24 ] found no link between engagement and session duration.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Log-in frequency was linked to engagement with web-based student learning in 1 study [ 22 ], whereas 2 similar studies found no such link [ 23 , 24 ]. In addition, one of these studies [ 24 ] found no link between engagement and session duration. However, all 3 studies focused on web-based learning.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%