As the fields of learning analytics and learning design mature, the convergence and synergies between these two fields became an important area for research. This paper intends to summarize the main outcomes of a systematic literature review of empirical evidence on learning analytics for learning design. Moreover, this paper presents an overview of what and how learning analytics have been used to inform learning design decisions and in what contexts. The search was performed in seven academic databases, resulting in 43 papers included in the main analysis. The results from the review depict the ongoing design patterns and learning phenomena that emerged from the synergy that learning analytics and learning design impose on the current status of learning technologies. Finally, this review stresses that future research should consider developing a framework on how to capture and systematize learning design data grounded in learning analytics and learning theory, and document what learning design choices made by educators influence subsequent learning activities and performances over time.

Background: Problem‐solving is a multidimensional and dynamic process that requires and interlinks cognitive, metacognitive, and affective dimensions of learning. However, current approaches practiced in computing education research (CER) are not sufficient to capture information beyond the basic programming process data (i.e., IDE‐log data). Therefore, how cognition and affect intertwine and unfold over time in programming problem‐solving activities are rarely investigated.Objectives: In this study, we examined how the theory‐informed measures from multimodal data that we have selected as proxies for cognitive and affective dimensions of learning, are associated with student performance, and in comparison, to prior‐knowledge.Methods: A high‐frequency temporal data was collected with a camera, an electroencephalogram, and an eye‐tracker from 40 computer science students (bachelor and master studies) in the context of a code‐debugging activity. To study the cognitive processes associated with learning we focused on cognitive load theory (CLT) and the human information processing model. In addition, we complemented CLT with the model of affective dynamics in learning to avoid the machine reductionism perspective.Results: Our findings demonstrated that attention, convergent thinking, and frustration were positively correlated with students' successful code‐debugging (i.e., performance), and frequently manifested by high performing participants. Cognitive load, memory load, and boredom were negatively correlated with students' performance, and typically manifested by low performing participants.Implications: Extending the context of analysis in reference to student cognitive processes and affective states, affords educators not just to identify lower performers, but also to understand the potential reasons behind their performance, making our method an important contribution in the confluence of CER and the learning technology communities. In addition, the insights extracted from our analyses allow us to discuss potential avenues for improving learning design and the design of interactive learning systems to support the development of students' problem‐solving skills.

Multimodal data have the potential to explore emerging learning practices that extend human cognitive capacities. A critical issue stretching in many multimodal learning analytics (MLA) systems and studies is the current focus aimed at supporting researchers to model learner behaviours, rather than directly supporting learners. Moreover, many MLA systems are designed and deployed without learners' involvement. We argue that in order to create MLA interfaces that directly support learning, we need to gain an expanded understanding of how multimodal data can support learners' authentic needs. We present a qualitative study in which 40 computer science students were tracked in an authentic learning activity using wearable and static sensors. Our findings outline learners' curated representations about multimodal data and the non‐technical challenges in using these data in their learning practice. The paper discusses 10 dimensions that can serve as guidelines for researchers and designers to create effective and ethically aware student‐facing MLA innovations.

Programming is a complex learning activity that involves coordination of cognitive processes and affective states. These aspects are often considered individually in computing education research, demonstrating limited understanding of how and when students learn best. This issue confines researchers to contextualize evidence-driven outcomes when learning behaviour deviates from pedagogical intentions. Multimodal learning analytics (MMLA) captures data essential for measuring constructs (e.g., cognitive load, confusion) that are posited in the learning sciences as important for learning, and cannot effectively be measured solely with the use of programming process data (IDE-log data). Thus, we augmented IDE-log data with physiological data (e.g., gaze data) and participants’ facial expressions, collected during a debugging learning activity. The findings emphasize the need for learning analytics that are consequential for learning, rather than easy and convenient to collect. In that regard, our paper aims to provoke productive reflections and conversations about the potential of MMLA to expand and advance the synergy of learning analytics and learning design among the community of educators from a post-evaluation design-aware process to a permanent monitoring process of adaptation.

With the wide expansion of distributed learning environments the way we learn became more diverse than ever. This poses an opportunity to incorporate different data sources of learning traces that can offer broader insights into learner behavior and the intricacies of the learning process. We argue that combining analytics across different e-learning systems can potentially measure the effectiveness of learning designs and maximize learning opportunities in distributed settings. As a step toward this goal, in this study, we considered how to broaden the context of a single learning environment into a learning ecosystem that integrates three separate e-learning systems. We present a cross-platform architecture that captures, integrates, and stores learning-related data from the learning ecosystem. To demonstrate the feasibility and the benefits of cross-platform architecture, we used regression and classification techniques to generate interpretable models with analytics that can be relevant for instructors in understanding learning behavior and sensemaking of the instructional method on learner performance. The results show that combining data across three e-learning systems improve the classification accuracy compared to data from a single learning system by a factor of 5. This article highlights the value of cross-platform learning analytics and presents a springboard for the creation of new cross-system data-driven research practices.

There is growing interest in creating learning analytics feedback interfaces that support students directly. While dashboards and other visualizations are proliferating, the evidence is that many fail to provide meaningful insights that help students reflect productively. The contribution of this article is qualitative and quantitative evidence from two studies evaluating a multimodal teamwork analytics tool in authentic clinical teamwork simulations. Collocated activity data are rendered to help nursing students reflect on errors and stress-related incidents during simulations. The user interface explicitly guides student reflection using data storytelling principles, tuned to the intended learning outcomes. The results demonstrate the potential of interfaces that “tell one data story at a time,” by helping students to identify misconceptions and errors; think about strategies they might use to address errors, and reflect on their arousal levels. The results also illuminate broader issues around automated formative assessment, and the intelligibility and accountability of learning analytics.