Dental education varies considerably across Europe, with differing traditions of stomatology (dentistry as a specialty of medicine) and odontology (single autonomous discipline). Dental curricula within the European Union (EU) are governed by European law expressed in directives that are binding on all EU member states. The Dental Directives (78/686/EC) base the curriculum on the odontological model, but compliance by individual schools is often poor. The differences within the EU will likely intensify with the accession of Eastern/Central European countries where the stomatological tradition is strong. Moreover, current proposals within the EU will reduce even the limited existing effectiveness of the Dental Directives. The DentEd Thematic Network Project, which aims to promote convergence of European curricula through voluntary self-assessment and outside peer review, has involved about 25 percent of European schools. Its effectiveness in inducing changes in individual schools is unknown. It is not an accreditation system, and there is no intention to establish a European-wide common curriculum.

Recently, the possibilities for leveraging ''big data'' in research and pedagogy have given rise to the growing field of ''learning analytics'' in online education. While much of this work has focused on quantitative metrics, some have called for critical perspectives that interrogate such data as an interplay between technical infrastructures and contingent social practices. Following such calls, this article conceptualizes ''learning analytics'' as an assemblage of technical, designed, and sociocognitive dimensions. Drawing on DeLanda's articulation of assemblage theory, we examine the ways online learning unfolds within and across these scales by using illustrative quantitative and qualitative data-click-data, user-generated content, and student interviews-from three online higher education courses. We consider how insights generated from such a stance might contribute to critical perspectives on how power circulates in online learning environments-a framework we call ''critical learning analytics.'' We conclude by offering some possibilities for which such a framework might be put to use-not only to map learning analytics as assemblage, but also to imagine how they might be assembled otherwise to promote more ethical instruction and more equitable student flourishing.

MOOC are characterized as being courses to which a large number of students enroll, but only a small fraction completes them. An understanding of students' engagement construct is essential to minimize dropout rates. This research is of a quantitative design and exploratory in nature, and investigates the interaction between contextual factors (demographic characteristics), student engagement types (academic, behavioral, cognitive and affective), and learning outcomes, with the objective of identifying the factors that are associated with completion of massive and open online courses. Two logistic models were adjusted in two samples, general and secondary, with the binary dependent variable defined as completes the course yes/no. The results in the general sample (15% completion rate) showed that the probabilities of a participant completing the course are positively and significantly related to participation in the forum and the participant educational level, and negatively related to gender (female) and age. The results in the secondary sample (87% completion rate) showed that the probabilities of a participant completing the course are positively and significantly related to participation in the forum,  gender (female), and the motivation and satisfaction indexes, and negatively related to age, having previous experience in other MOOC, and self-efficacy and task strategies indexes. The results lead to ideas on how these variables can be used to support students to persist in these learning environments.

No abstract

This chapter explores the ways sixth grade students from a linguistically and culturally diverse classroom used Diigo, an online social bookmarking site, to engage in annotation writing focused on the discussion of science ideas within a text. While the use of apps has rapidly increased in schools, there remains little research on the ways annotation writing can be used to support scientific argumentation. Findings from this study indicate that students used the annotation app to pose questions, formulate claims, and request evidence from peers to answer questions or support claims. These results suggest that the process of collaborative annotation encourages students' documentation, critique, and refinement of ideas, which can aid learners in close reading of science texts.