The use of learning dashboards to support complex in-class pedagogical scenarios in medical training: how do they influence students’ cognitive engagement?

Abstract

This study aims to contribute to empirical and interdisciplinary knowledge on how visual learning analytics tools can support students’ cognitive engagement in complex in-class scenarios. Taking a holistic approach, instructional design, learning analytics, and students’ perceptions were examined together. The teaching of systematic viewing and image interpretation in radiology education was used to exemplify a complex in-class scenario, and a specific learning dashboard was designed as a support tool. The design was based on both educational and visualization theories and aligned with a pedagogical scenario integrating individual and class-wide activities. The quantity and quality of the cognitive engagement of a group of 26 students were explored. A mixed method approach was used, including computer log file analyses of individual work, analysis of video recordings of in-class small group discussions, and a focus group discussion with the students involved. The in-class scenario with the learning dashboard resulted in a good balance between individual tasks and group discussions and a high degree of active cognitive engagement. Constructive and interactive forms of cognitive engagement were, however, less evident. In addition, the products of these constructive (description of findings) and interactive (type of dialogue) cognitive engagements were of mediocre quality and therefore not optimal for knowledge transfer. The study also showed that the way the students and teacher understood their respective tasks and used the available interaction techniques of the learning dashboard highly influenced the students’ cognitive engagement. Finally, several ideas emerged that could help to overcome the deficits found in the training of participants and to improve the tasks set and the learning dashboard itself.

Student engagement in undergraduate medical education: A scoping review

“…As shown in Figure 2 (upper panel), most of the articles (94.1%, n = 48) are published in the last 8 years. The lower panel of Figure 2 shows that 47.1% ( n = 24) of the studies are conducted in the United States, 26–49 9.8% ( n = 5) in the United Kingdom, 50–54 9.8% ( n = 5) in Australia, 55–59 4% ( n = 2) in Germany, 60,61 4% ( n = 2) in the Netherlands, 62,63 2% ( n = 1) in Canada, 64 2% ( n = 1) in Norway, 65 2% ( n = 1) in Ireland, 66 5.8% ( n = 3) in China, 67–69 4% ( n = 2) in Turkey, 70,71 2% ( n = 1) in Pakistan, 72 2% ( n = 1) in Malaysia, 73 2% ( n = 1) in Korea, 74 2% ( n = 1) in India 75 and 2% ( n = 1) in Brazil 76 . The methodology in the included studies were quantitative in 66.7% ( n = 34), qualitative in 11.8% ( n = 6) and mixed methods in 21.6% ( n = 11).…”

“…From the selected studies, 43 studies have used one or more than one instrument for measuring student engagement. The most frequently used instrument is the self‐report in 51.0% ( n = 22) of the studies, 26–28,32,34,37–39,43,53,57,59,62–67,69,73–75 although real‐time measures were used in 19.0% ( n = 8), 29,31,33,36,40,46,47,76 multiple methods represented 16.0% ( n = 7), 41,44,45,50,51,56,60 direct observation represented 7.0% ( n = 3) 42,70,71 and interviews used in 7.0% ( n = 3) of the studies 55,58,68 . For the level of measuring student engagement, 42% ( n = 18) studies are measuring at the activity level, 29,32–34,41,42,44,45,56,59,60,62,65,66,70,71,73,76 37% ( n = 16) at the course level 27,31,36–40,46,47,50,51,53,55,57,58,68 and 21% ( n = 9) at the medical school level 26,28,43,63,64,67,69,74,75 …”

“…The most frequently used instrument is the self-report in 51.0% (n = 22) of the studies, [26][27][28]32,34,[37][38][39]43,53,57,59,[62][63][64][65][66][67]69,[73][74][75] although real-time measures were used in 19.0% (n = 8), 29,31,33,36,40,46,47,76 multiple methods represented 16.0% (n = 7), 41,44,45,50,51,56,60 direct observation represented 7.0% (n = 3) 42,70,71 and interviews used in 7.0% (n = 3) of the studies. 55,58,68 For the level of measuring student engagement, 42% (n = 18) studies are measuring at the activity level, 29,[32][33][34]41,42,…”

“…49 An additional 17 studies examined the role of the TEL environment in facilitating the medical student engagement. The use of technology in these studies includes simulation-based learning, 29,44,56,68 microblogs, 47 social media, 46,52,75 adaptive tutorials, 59 videoconference sessions, 31,41 digital games, 55 three-dimensional printed models, 58 virtual reality using 360 videos, 32,57,66 learning dashboards 60 and audience response systems. 51 Furthermore, there are five studies that examined the factors which facilitate students' state of connection with the school community (school engagement).…”

Learning analytics driven improvements in learning design in higher education: A systematic literature review

“…It seems only logical that researchers approached LA-LD related issues referring to engagement (deLeng & Pawelka, 2020; Fan et al, 2021, etc. ), motivation(Hung et al, 2017), self-regulated learning(Estévez-Ayres et al, 2017), social learning(Almatrafi & Johri, 2022;Haya et al, 2015), social constructivism(Er et al, 2019),…”