| Research, Students, University Operations

Learner Facing Analytics report

The IRU has published a new report exploring student understandings and concerns in relation to the collection and use of learning analytics.

Titled “Learner Facing Analytics: Analysis of Student Perspectives”, the report is the result of a two-year student-focused project that aimed to:

  • explore student understandings and concerns in relation to learning analytics
  • gather student input on the types of learning analytics reports, dashboards and tools that will be most useful in supporting student success
  • develop a series of principles to guide institutions in the creation of student-facing dashboards
  • identify the processes and training required to support students and staff to make sense of the data presented in dashboards and improve student success.

A core component of this work was a survey of 2017 students across the IRU and focus group participation from 34 students (also from across the IRU network).

The project authors are Deborah West (Flinders University), Bill Searle (Charles Darwin University), Jessica Vanderlelie (La Trobe University), Danny Toohey (Murdoch University), Ann Luzeckyj (Flinders University) and Kevin Bell (Western Sydney University).


The final recommendations of the report are below. See the full report for context and more information about the conclusions.

  1. Universities are explicit about the data they are collecting, how it is going to be used and for what purpose when seeking informed consent from students.
  2. Students are reminded at least once per year about data that is being collected.
  3. Universities focus on developing student-facing dashboards related to: the provision of additional services or materials related to study (regardless of student grades); showing progression through subject material; providing information on how students might change their study habits to improve final grades.
  4. Universities exhibit caution when providing dashboards which include data that compares a student’s progress with others in their class or cohort.
  5. Students are provided with the option to turn dashboards and push notifications triggered by learning analytics on and off and advised of any consequences regarding these actions. 6. Universities exhibit caution when collecting ‘academic’ and ‘non-academic’ data and using it to trigger student support services.

The full report is now available to download here, or from the Publications page of the IRU website.

Read the full “Learner Facing Analytics” report (PDF)

Watch the authors’ report presentation on YouTube

| Media Releases, Research

Joint statement in support of scientific peer review

The IRU has given its backing to the following statement in support of scientific peer review, coordinated by the National Research and Innovation Alliance (NRIA):

Australia cannot afford to compromise the principles underpinning scientific research

The National Research and Innovation Alliance resolutely takes the view that benefits to the nation and the advancement of knowledge are best served by a culture where researchers can put forward views and present data for discussion and scrutiny free from interference and without fear of reprisal.

As organisations representing researchers across the nation, we commit to the Principle of Universality (freedom and responsibility) of Science.

In return for scientific freedoms, researchers must ensure they conduct their work responsibly and ethically, respecting regulations and laws. Researchers recognise they have a duty to contribute to the public good by placing societal benefits ahead of personal gain, acknowledging risk and uncertainty, and being accountable for responsible and honest communication of their work.

Principles that guide the scientific enterprise include posing testable and refutable hypotheses; designing studies that test competing counter-hypotheses, using transparent methods that enable other scientists to verify their accuracy, and recognising the importance of independent replication across studies.

Research knowledge forms the basis of innovations and advances that serve the well-being of society, however, it is acknowledged that they can also do harm. Given this, researchers take seriously their obligation to critically reflect upon how their expertise is used, particularly when asked to support decision-making and policy processes.

Peer Review as a foundation for dependable and quality research

An important element that unites scientific inquiry is disclosing findings and subjecting them to scrutiny and critique by peer review. Peer review provides evaluation of work by people who are qualified to judge the matter under consideration and who have current or recent research experience and are therefore exposed in turn to the same form of scrutiny.

Peer review is widely regarded as the scientific seal of approval, denoting quality, validity, and importance. This allows knowledge to be generated, compared, tested and refined over time.

This mechanism helps ensure that the scientific record represents the best available knowledge and it is the responsibility of all researchers to participate in this process.

Researchers will not consider a scientific finding as valid unless it has been approved by the process of peer review. In its absence, researchers consider any findings presented as preliminary and potentially flawed.

Those who disagree with peer-reviewed findings should participate in the scientific process and subject their findings to the same level of scrutiny and review.

Attempts to bypass peer review allow unqualified individuals and organisations to compare their often ad hoc views with findings derived from well-controlled analyses of available data and experimental investigations. This has the potential to subject science to political interference.

Peer review is to the governing of the scientific enterprise what democracy is to the governing of the country. The concept of peer review retains the confidence of the majority of researchers and the Australian research funding agencies, assuring that they support the highest quality research.

The confidence of the research community, and of the taxpayer, that the public investment in the national research base is well managed, can be sustained only if an effective form of peer review holds.

The fundamental principles and processes outlined in this statement have underpinned knowledge generation for centuries and are essential to inform decision making by policy makers as well as by members of the broader community. Any attempt to undermine them erodes decision making in our nation.

The NRIA is an Australian alliance of peak university bodies, Science and Technology Australia, the learned academies, medical research peak bodies and a range of other representative groups from the public and private sector. Its aim is to secure bi-partisan support for strategic, stable, long-term funding of science and research and to put an end to stop-start funding models.