The advances in technology to capture and process unprecedented amounts of educational data has boosted the interest in Learning Analytics Dashboard (LAD) applications as a way to provide meaningful visual information to administrators, parents, teachers and learners. Despite the frequent argument that LADs are useful to support target users and their goals to monitor and act upon the information provided, little is known about LADs’ theoretical underpinnings and the alignment (or lack thereof) between LADs intended outcomes and the measures used to evaluate their implementation. However, this knowledge is necessary to illuminate more efficient approaches in the development and implementation of LAD tools. Guided by the self-regulated learning perspective and using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework, this systematic literature review addressed this gap by examining whether and how learner-facing LAD’s target outcomes align with the domain measures used to evaluate their implementations. Out of the 1297 papers retrieved from 15 databases, 28 were included in the final quantitative and qualitative analysis. Results suggested an intriguing lack of alignment between LADs’ intended outcomes (mostly cognitive domain) and their evaluation (mostly affective measures). Based on these results and on the premise that LADs are designed to support learners, a critical recommendation from this study is that LADs’ target outcomes should guide the selection of measures used to evaluate the efficacy of these tools. This alignment is critical to enable the construction of more robust guidelines to inform future endeavours in the field.

中文翻译：

---

保持目标：关于面向学习者的学习分析仪表板的系统文献综述

捕获和处理空前数量的教育数据的技术进步提高了人们对学习分析仪表板 (LAD) 应用程序的兴趣，因为它可以为管理员、家长、教师和学习者提供有意义的视觉信息。尽管经常有争论称 LAD 有助于支持目标用户及其目标以监测和根据所提供的信息采取行动，但对 LAD 的理论基础以及 LAD 预期结果与用于评估的措施之间的一致性（或缺乏一致性）知之甚少他们的实施。然而，这些知识对于阐明 LAD 工具开发和实施中更有效的方法是必要的。在自我调节的学习观点的指导下，并使用系统评价和元分析的首选报告项目 (PRISMA) 框架，本系统文献回顾通过检查面向学习者的 LAD 的目标结果是否以及如何与所使用的领域措施保持一致，解决了这一差距来评估他们的实施。在从 15 个数据库中检索到的 1297 篇论文中，有 28 篇被纳入最终的定量和定性分析。结果表明，LAD 的预期结果（主要是认知领域）与其评估（主要是情感测量）之间缺乏一致性。基于这些结果，并在 LAD 旨在支持学习者的前提下，本研究的一项重要建议是，LAD 的目标结果应指导用于评估这些工具有效性的措施的选择。这种一致性对于构建更强大的指导方针来为该领域的未来努力提供信息至关重要。