Hello everyone.
In this article, I will introduce the paper read in this week’s English seminar and share my thoughts on it.

Paper Title: Designing a classroom-level teacher dashboard to foster primary school teachers’ direct instruction of self-regulated learning strategies
Journal: Education and Information Technologies
Year of Publication: 2025
Pages: 1-35
Authors: Melis Dülger, Anouschka van Leeuwen, Jeroen Janssen & Liesbeth Kester

In a classroom environment, it is difficult for teachers to accurately and timely grasp student needs, and there is a particular demand for systematic support tools for teaching Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) skills. To address this challenge, this study adopts a theory-driven and user-centered design approach. Through multiple investigations, it designs a teacher dashboard to support primary school teachers in effectively providing direct instruction on SRL strategies. The study uses the COPES model (Winne & Hadwin, 1998) as its theoretical foundation. In the COPES model, SRL learners are considered to experience four recursively ordered phases: “task definition,” “goal setting and planning,” “enactment,” and “adaptation.” In each phase, learners understand the task based on prior knowledge and experience, set learning goals, monitor and control progress while executing the task, and finally reflect on their progress and adjust as necessary.

The research methodology consists of two studies. In Study 1, a qualitative study using storyboards and reflective questions was conducted with 10 primary school teachers in the Netherlands and Belgium. For the storyboards, four scenarios covering classroom situations corresponding to each phase of the COPES model and three additional scenarios requiring teachers’ instructional decisions were created, followed by 30-45 minute semi-structured interviews. Through these scenarios, the study explored how student SRL information visualized on a dashboard could assist in instructional decision-making. Data collection involved recording and transcribing all interviews. In the analysis, three researchers coded and analyzed the responses based on the COPES model and pre-determined codes. The reflective questions covered detailed inquiries into indicators of student SRL, instruction of SRL strategies, and preferences for teacher dashboard design.

Results from Study 1 clarified teachers’ needs for a dashboard. First, in the task definition phase, it was confirmed that checking students’ prior knowledge, detecting knowledge gaps, and assessing motivation were prioritized. In the goal setting and planning phase, checking the achievement status of learning goals and confirming weekly task plans were requested. In the enactment phase, checking correct/incorrect task responses and grasping goal attainment were emphasized, while in the adaptation phase, help-seeking behavior, time spent on tasks, and behavioral patterns during problem-solving were noted. Regarding dashboard design, teachers valued the “ease of viewing” and “ease of management” of information visualization, desiring a concise design that allows them to grasp students’ SRL processes at a glance. Specifically, a hierarchical information structure (drill-down from the whole class to individual information), customization functions (toggling display/hide, adding individual notes), and appropriate color-coding were requested. Based on the findings of Study 1, a low-fidelity prototype with four widgets based on the COPES model was designed: (1) Task Definition Widget (prior knowledge and motivation), (2) Goal Setting Widget (setting learning goals and achievement percentage), (3) Enactment Widget (number of correct/incorrect answers, ability indicators), and (4) Adaptation Widget (visualization of learning paths).

In Study 2, the designed low-fidelity prototype was evaluated by 11 primary school teachers in the Netherlands. The prototype was presented, and questions regarding clarity and practicality were asked for each widget based on scenarios. Audio recordings were transcribed, and systematic coding analysis was conducted on SRL definitions, direct instruction of strategies, and the clarity and practicality of the dashboard. Results from Study 2 yielded several important findings. Regarding the key components of SRL, most teachers mentioned “monitoring.” Some teachers also touched upon “adaptation,” “goal setting,” and “motivation,” but mentions of “self-evaluation” and “help-seeking” were few. Regarding the instruction of SRL strategies, while some teachers focused on either cognitive strategies (organizing, rehearsing) or metacognitive strategies (planning, evaluating), instruction integrating both was not mentioned. In the evaluation of the dashboard’s clarity and practicality, many teachers found the Task Definition Widget (displaying prior knowledge and motivation) and the Enactment Widget (number of correct/incorrect answers, etc.) to be clear. On the other hand, the Goal Setting and Adaptation widgets were difficult to understand, and confusion regarding flag functions and technical terminology was observed. Furthermore, as for dashboard data, there was a strong desire for a dashboard that integrates not only detailed information on individual learning status but also visually clear and organized information on the entire student body. Based on these findings, the authors created a medium-fidelity prototype. Major improvements included enlarging the circle size and adding flag displays in the Goal Setting Widget. A function to present functional explanations of widgets was added, and a system-recommended action display function was also implemented. In all widgets, the design was considered so that teachers could understand information more intuitively and connect it to practical instructional actions.

Below are my thoughts. This study was very informative in its method of translating the theoretical framework of the COPES model into concrete classroom scenarios using storyboards to extract teachers’ actual needs. Furthermore, similar findings have been obtained in my own research on teacher dashboards, and I have reaffirmed that teachers in the field have a high need not only to check learning data for the entire class but also to monitor learning data for individual students. Also, the current state of teachers’ understanding of SRL revealed in this study was an interesting discovery. The result that teachers understand “self-monitoring” and “adaptation” but have limited knowledge regarding specific strategy instruction provides important implications for considering the role of the dashboard. It became clear that a design as a “learning support tool” that assists in the instruction of SRL strategies, rather than just an information presentation tool, is necessary. Overall, I felt that this study provides an important foundation for the design of Learning Analytics Dashboards (LAD) for teachers. In particular, I would like to incorporate this approach, which is theory-driven yet emphasizes field needs, into my own research methodology.

Author: Xuewang Geng