This paper (10 page PDF) examines "the observed strategies of high and low performers throughout the course" and identifies "prototypical pathways associated with course success and failure." The objective here is to "translate analytic findings to practice" by "establishing a model of learner behaviour that is both predictive of student course performance, and easily interpreted by instructors." I think it's only partially successful, first, because as the authors themselves note, "awareness that a particular tactic or strategy is generally beneficial is often insufficient motivation for a student to adopt it," and second, the labeling of these practices is itself a challenge. The labels used (assessment, learning content access, social interaction, etc.) when used to describe successful learning patterns amount mostly to (what I would characterize as) "students that did more generally succeeded." Which may be true, but is unhelpful. A useful analysis would have to dig into, say, types of learning content analysis.
Today: 0 Total: 1100 [Direct link] [Share]
