The burgeoning field of learning analytics (LA) is gaining significant traction in education, bolstered by the increasing amounts of student data generated through educational software. However, critical discussions of LA are in short supply. Drawing on work in the cultural studies of data and critical algorithm studies, this paper begins by examining three central issues: the distancing and “black boxing” of LA disciplinary practices, the mythologizing of objective data, and the concern for future prediction. The second section describes the design and implementation of the “Learning Analytics Report Card” (LARC), a pilot project that sought to develop experimental approaches to LA. As such, rather than seeking to simply produce analytics, the LARC attempted to foster critical awareness of computational data analysis among teachers and learners.
AndrejevicM.HearnA.KennedyH.2015. “Cultural Studies of Data Mining: Introduction.” European Journal of Cultural Studies18 (4–5): 379–94.
3.
BeerColinJonesDavidClarkDamien. 2012. “Analytics and Complexity: Learning and Leading for the Future.” 29th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE 2012): Future Challenges, Sustainable Futures, Wellington, New Zealand, November 25–28.
4.
BeerD.2009. “Power through the Algorithm? Participatory Web Cultures and the Technological Unconscious.” New Media & Society11 (6): 985–1002. doi:10.1177/1461444809336551.
5.
BoellstorffTomMaurerBill. 2015. “Introduction.” In BoellstorffT.MaurerB. (eds) Data, Now Bigger and Better!Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press, pp. 1–6.
6.
boydd.CrawfordK.2012. “Critical Questions for Big Data.” Information, Communication & Society15 (5): 662–79.
CooperAdam. 2012. “What Is Analytics? Definition and Essential Characteristics.” CETIS Analytics Series1 (5): 1–10.
13.
EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research (ECAR)-Analytics Working Group. 2015. “The Predictive Learning Analytics Revolution: Leveraging Learning Data for Student Success.” ECAR Working Group Paper, Louisville, CO, October7.
14.
EynonR.2013. “The Rise of Big Data: What Does It Mean for Education, Technology, and Media Research?”Learning, Media and Technology38 (3): 237–40. doi:10.1080/17439884.2013.771783.
15.
GasevicDraganDawsonShaneSiemensGeorge. 2015. “Let’s Not Forget Learning Analytics Are about Learning.” Tech Trends59 (1): 64–71.
16.
GillespieT.2014. “The Relevance of Algorithms.” In Media Technologies, edited by GillespieTarletonBoczkowskiPabloFootKirsten, 167–94. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
PenroseRoger. 1990. The Emperor’s New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and the Laws of Physics. London: Vintage.
26.
PerrottaC.WilliamsonB.2016. “The Social Life of Learning Analytics: Cluster Analysis and the ‘Performance’ of Algorithmic Education.” Learning, Media and Technology. Published electronically May17. doi: 10.1080/17439884.2016.1182927
27.
RogersTim. 2015. “Critical Realism and Learning Analytics Research: Epistemological Implications of an Ontological Foundation.” Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge - LAK ’15, 223–30. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2723576.2723631.
28.
SiemensGeorge. 2013. “Learning Analytics: The Emergence of a Discipline.” American Behavioral Scientist57 (10): 1380–400.
29.
StriphasT.2015. “Algorithmic Culture.” European Journal of Cultural Studies18 (4–5): 395–412.
30.
TufekciZ.2015. “Algorithmic Harms beyond Facebook and Google: Emergent Challenges of Computational Agency.” Colorado Technology Law Journal13 (2): 203–18.
31.
van BarneveldAngelaArnoldKimberly E.CampbellJohn P.2012. “Analytics in Higher Education: Establishing a Common Language.” ELI Paper2012 (1): 1–11.
32.
WilliamsonB., ed. 2015. Coding/Learning: Software and Digital Data in Education. Stirling, UK: University of Stirling.
