Recipe for success — Lessons learnt from using xAPI within the Connected Learning Analytics toolkit

An ongoing challenge for Learning Analytics research has been the scalable derivation of user interaction data from multiple technologies. The complexities associated with this challenge are increasing as educators embrace an ever growing number of social and content related technologies. The Experience API (xAPI) alongside the development of user specific record stores has been touted as a means to address this challenge, but a number of subtle considerations must be made when using xAPI in Learning Analytics. This paper provides a general overview to the complexities and challenges of using xAPI in a general systemic analytics solution - called the Connected Learning Analytics (CLA) toolkit. The importance of design is emphasised, as is the notion of common vocabularies and xAPI Recipes. Early decisions about vocabularies and structural relationships between statements can serve to either facilitate or handicap later analytics solutions. The CLA toolkit case study provides us with a way of examining both the strengths and the weaknesses of the current xAPI specification, and we conclude with a proposal for how xAPI might be improved by using JSON-LD to formalise Recipes in a machine readable form.

The Connected Learning Analytics toolkit

This demonstration introduces the Connected Learning Analytics (CLA) Toolkit. The CLA toolkit harvests data about student participation in specified learning activities across standard social media environments, and presents information about the nature and quality of the learning interactions.

The effectiveness of the teach-back method on adherence and self-management in health education for people with chronic disease: A systematic review

- BACKGROUND Chronic diseases are increasing worldwide and have become a significant burden to those affected by those diseases. Disease-specific education programs have demonstrated improved outcomes, although people do forget information quickly or memorize it incorrectly. The teach-back method was introduced in an attempt to reinforce education to patients. To date, the evidence regarding the effectiveness of health education employing the teach-back method in improved care has not yet been reviewed systematically. - OBJECTIVES This systematic review examined the evidence on using the teach-back method in health education programs for improving adherence and self-management of people with chronic disease. - INCLUSION CRITERIA Types of participants: Adults aged 18 years and over with one or more than one chronic disease. Types of intervention: All types of interventions which included the teach-back method in an education program for people with chronic diseases. The comparator was chronic disease education programs that did not involve the teach-back method. Types of studies: Randomized and non-randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, before-after studies and case-control studies. Types of outcomes: The outcomes of interest were adherence, self-management, disease-specific knowledge, readmission, knowledge retention, self-efficacy and quality of life. - SEARCH STRATEGY Searches were conducted in CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Source, and Google Scholar databases. Search terms were combined by AND or OR in search strings. Reference lists of included articles were also searched for further potential references. - METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY Two reviewers conducted quality appraisal of papers using the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument. - DATA EXTRACTION Data were extracted using the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument data extraction instruments. - DATA SYNTHESIS There was significant heterogeneity in selected studies, hence a meta-analysis was not possible and the results were presented in narrative form. - RESULTS Of the 21 articles retrieved in full, 12 on the use of the teach-back method met the inclusion criteria and were selected for analysis. Four studies confirmed improved disease-specific knowledge in intervention participants. One study showed a statistically significant improvement in adherence to medication and diet among type 2 diabetics patients in the intervention group compared to the control group (p < 0.001). Two studies found statistically significant improvements in self-efficacy (p = 0.0026 and p < 0.001) in the intervention groups. One study examined quality of life in heart failure patients but the results did not improve from the intervention (p = 0.59). Five studies found a reduction in readmission rates and hospitalization but these were not always statistically significant. Two studies showed improvement in daily weighing among heart failure participants, and in adherence to diet, exercise and foot care among those with type 2 diabetes. - CONCLUSION Overall, the teach-back method showed positive effects in a wide range of health care outcomes although these were not always statistically significant. Studies in this systematic review revealed improved outcomes in disease-specific knowledge, adherence, self-efficacy and the inhaler technique. There was a positive but inconsistent trend also seen in improved self-care and reduction of hospital readmission rates. There was limited evidence on improvement in quality of life or disease related knowledge retention.

Dominating search: Google before the law

For many, particularly in the Anglophone world and Western Europe, it may be obvious that Google has a monopoly over online search and advertising and that this is an undesirable state of affairs, due to Google's ability to mediate information flows online. The baffling question may be why governments and regulators are doing little to nothing about this situation, given the increasingly pivotal importance of the internet and free flowing communications in our lives. However, the law concerning monopolies, namely antitrust or competition law, works in what may be seen as a less intuitive way by the general public. Monopolies themselves are not illegal. Conduct that is unlawful, i.e. abuses of that market power, is defined by a complex set of rules and revolves principally around economic harm suffered due to anticompetitive behavior. However the effect of information monopolies over search, such as Google’s, is more than just economic, yet competition law does not address this. Furthermore, Google’s collection and analysis of user data and its portfolio of related services make it difficult for others to compete. Such a situation may also explain why Google’s established search rivals, Bing and Yahoo, have not managed to provide services that are as effective or popular as Google’s own (on this issue see also the texts by Dirk Lewandowski and Astrid Mager in this reader). Users, however, are not entirely powerless. Google's business model rests, at least partially, on them – especially the data collected about them. If they stop using Google, then Google is nothing.

Aircraft trajectory clustering techniques using circular statistics

This paper presents a statistical aircraft trajectory clustering approach aimed at discriminating between typical manned and expected unmanned traffic patterns. First, a resampled version of each trajectory is modelled using a mixture of Von Mises distributions (circular statistics). Second, the remodelled trajectories are globally aligned using tools from bioinformatics. Third, the alignment scores are used to cluster the trajectories using an iterative k-medoids approach and an appropriate distance function. The approach is then evaluated using synthetically generated unmanned aircraft flights combined with real air traffic position reports taken over a sector of Northern Queensland, Australia. Results suggest that the technique is useful in distinguishing between expected unmanned and manned aircraft traffic behaviour, as well as identifying some common conventional air traffic patterns.

The application of learning analytics to improve learning: Questions from the academy

Since 2007, close collaboration between the Learning and Teaching Unit’s Academic Quality and Standards team and the Department of Reporting and Analysis’ Business Objects team resulted in a generational approach to reporting where QUT established a place of trust. This place of trust is where data owners are confident in date storage, data integrity, reported and shared. While the role of the Department of Reporting and Analysis focused on the data warehouse, data security and publication of reports, the Academic Quality and Standards team focused on the application of learning analytics to solve academic research questions and improve student learning. Addressing questions such as: • Are all students who leave course ABC academically challenged? • Do the students who leave course XYZ stay within the faculty, university or leave? • When students withdraw from a unit do they stay enrolled on full or part load or leave? • If students enter through a particular pathway, what is their experience in comparison to other pathways? • With five years historic reporting, can a two-year predictive forecast provide any insight? In answering these questions, the Academic Quality and Standards team then developed prototype data visualisation through curriculum conversations with academic staff. Where these enquiries were applicable more broadly this information would be brought into the standardised reporting for the benefit of the whole institution. At QUT an annual report to the executive committees allows all stakeholders to record the performance and outcomes of all courses in a snapshot in time or use this live report at any point during the year. This approach to learning analytics was awarded the Awarded 2014 ATEM/Campus Review Best Practice Awards in Tertiary Education Management for The Unipromo Award for Excellence in Information Technology Management.

Google, online search and consumer confusion in Australia

The legality of the operation of Google’s search engine, and its liability as an Internet intermediary, has been tested in various jurisdictions on various grounds. In Australia, there was an ultimately unsuccessful case against Google under the Australian Consumer Law relating to how it presents results from its search engine. Despite this failed claim, several complex issues were not adequately addressed in the case including whether Google sufficiently distinguishes between the different parts of its search results page, so as not to mislead or deceive consumers. This article seeks to address this question of consumer confusion by drawing on empirical survey evidence of Australian consumers’ understanding of Google’s search results layout. This evidence, the first of its kind in Australia, indicates some level of consumer confusion. The implications for future legal proceedings in against Google in Australia and in other jurisdictions are discussed.