CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Introduction

Data analysis and interpretation is the process of assigning meaning to the collected

information and determining the conclusions, significance and implications of the findings. It is

an important and exciting step in the process of research. In all research studies, analysis follows

data collection. According to C.R.Kothari (1989), “The term analysis refers to the computation

of measures along with searching for patterns of relationship that exist among data-groups”.

Analysis involves estimating the values of unknown parameters of the population and testing of

hypotheses for drawing inferences.

Research in learning analytics as well as the development and implementation of learning

analytics applications in educational institutions has been steadily on the rise during the last

years, there is still a gap between the potential of learning analytics identified by research and

how much of this potential has been achieved so far. Learning analytics is a multi-disciplinary

research field that builds on ideas from and connects to other fields such as learning sciences,

computer supported collaborative learning, technology enhanced learning, cyber-learning,

learning at scale, and user modeling.

Title of the Present study is “Effectiveness of Learning Analytics in School Based

Assessment.” This study aimed to ensue towards the goal of research; the investigator has raised

the following questions to find out the effectiveness of learning analytics model (LAM) in

School Based Assessment in the present research.

4.2 Analysis and Interpretation of the data

The present study focused two types of analysis, as per the design adopted for this study

mixed method of data interpretation have made. In quantitative part intended to find out the

impact of workshop on learning analytics and the school based assessment which are to find out

the level of skill acquired by the teachers through it. For qualitative analyses the verbal data have

collected through feedback schedule and focus group interview. The data are presented in five

dimensions as if the utility and benefits of learning analytics in school level assessment i.e.

Knowledge in fundamentals of learning analytics, Skill of implementation of school based

assessment, Feasibility in implementation of LA in school based assessment, Learning analytics

in Learning support, Data aspects – comparability, efficiency and transparency.

4.3 Testing Formulated Hypothesis

Hypothesis 1:

There is no significant difference between pre-test mean scores of control group and

experimental group of teachers in their knowledge and skill in implementation of LA in SBA.

Table 4.1

Mean difference of the teachers in control group and experimental group

Category N MEAN SD P* value

Control group 30 35.62 4.69

0.014
Experimental group 30 33.13 7.81
*0.01 level of significance
 Figure 4.1 Mean difference of the teachers in control group and experimental group

40
35.62
35 33.13

30

25

20 Control group
Experimental group
15

10 7.81
4.69
5

0
MEAN SD

The calculated value of the control and experimental group teachers shown in the table

4.1, there is no difference between control and experimental group teachers in their mean scores

in pre-test. So the hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the knowledge and implementation

skill of the teachers are same in pre-test towards learning analysis and school based assessment.
Hypothesis 2:

There is no significant difference between male and female teachers in pre-test of control

group in their knowledge and skill in implementation of LA in SBA.

Table 4.2

Mean difference of the teachers in male and female teachers in pre-test of control group

GENDER N MEAN SD P* value

FEMALE 17 36.22 3.89

0.01
MALE 13 38.86 4.55

*0.01 level of significance

The above table 4.2 shows the mean difference of the teachers of control group in pre-

test, there is no difference between male and female teachers in control group teachers in their

mean scores in pre-test. So the hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the knowledge and

implementation skill of the male and female teachers are same in pre-test towards learning

analysis and school based assessment.

Figure 4.2 Mean difference of the teachers in male and female teachers in pre-test of control

group

74.81
80 72.33

70

60

50
MEAN
40 SD
30

20
3.89 4.55
10

0
FEMALE MALE
Hypothesis 3:

There is no significant difference between rural and urban teachers in pre-test of control

group in their knowledge and skill in implementation of LA in SBA.

Table 4.3 Mean difference of the teachers in rural and urban teachers in pre-test of control group

Location N MEAN SD P* value

RURAL 19 35.22 3.89

0.01
URBAN 11 36.86 4.55

*0.01 level of significance

The above table 4.3 shows the mean difference of the teachers of control group in pre-

test, there is no difference between male and female teachers in control group teachers in their

mean scores in pre-test. So the hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the knowledge and

implementation skill of the male and female teachers are same in pre-test towards learning

analysis and school based assessment.

Figure 4.3 Mean difference of the teachers in rural and urban teachers in pre-test of control

group

80
73.16 74.33
70

60

50

40 MEAN
SD
30

20

10 6.22 5.88

0
RURAL URBAN
Hypothesis 4:

There is no significant difference between teachers having above 10 years of experience and

below 10 years in pre-test of control group in their knowledge and skill in implementation of

LA in SBA.

Table 4.4: Mean difference of the teachers in pre-test of control group with relate to their years

of experience

Experience N MEAN SD P* value

Above 10 years 13 36.73 4.71

0.011
Below 10 years 17 35.11 4.01

*0.01 level of significance

The above table 4.4 shows the mean difference of the teachers of control group in pre-

test, there is no difference between teachers having above 10 years of experience and below 10

years in pre-test of control group in their mean scores in pre-test. So the hypothesis is accepted.

It is concluded that the knowledge and implementation skill of the male and female teachers are

same in pre-test towards learning analysis and school based assessment.

Figure 4.4 Mean difference of the teachers in pre-test of control group with relate to their years

of experience

80
71.27 73.22
70

60

50

40 MEAN
SD
30

20

10 7.22 6.81

0
Above 10 years Below 10 years
Hypothesis 5:

There is no significant difference between male and female teachers in pre-test of

experimental group in their knowledge and skill in implementation of LA in SBA.

Table 4.5

Mean difference of the teachers in male and female teachers in pre-test of experimental group

GENDER N MEAN SD P* value

FEMALE 17 36.22 3.89

0.01
MALE 13 38.86 4.55

*0.01 level of significance

The above table 4.5 shows the mean difference of the teachers of experimental group in

pre-test, there is no difference between male and female teachers in control group teachers in

their mean scores in pre-test. So the hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the knowledge

and implementation skill of the male and female teachers are same in pre-test towards learning

analysis and school based assessment.

Figure 4.5 Mean difference of the teachers in male and female teachers in pre-test of

experimental group

74.81 72.33
80

70

60

50
MEAN
40 SD
30

20
3.89 4.55
10

0
FEMALE MALE
Hypothesis 6:

There is no significant difference between rural and urban teachers in pre-test of

experimental group in their knowledge and skill in implementation of LA in SBA.

Table 4.6 Mean difference of the teachers in rural and urban teachers in pre-test of experimental

group

Location N MEAN SD P* value

RURAL 19 35.22 3.89

0.01
URBAN 11 36.86 4.55

*0.01 level of significance

The above table 4.6 shows the mean difference of the teachers of experimental group in

pre-test, there is no difference between male and female teachers in control group teachers in

their mean scores in pre-test. So the hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the knowledge

and implementation skill of the male and female teachers are same in pre-test towards learning

analysis and school based assessment.

Figure 4.6 Mean difference of the teachers in rural and urban teachers in pre-test of control

group

80
73.16 74.33
70

60

50

40 MEAN
SD
30

20

10 6.22 5.88

0
RURAL URBAN
Hypothesis 7:

There is no significant difference between teachers having above 10 years of experience and

below 10 years in pre-test of experimental group in their knowledge and skill in

implementation of LA in SBA.

Table 4.7: Mean difference of the teachers in pre-test of experimental group with relate to their

years of experience

Experience N MEAN SD P* value

Above 10 years 13 36.73 4.71

0.011
Below 10 years 17 35.11 4.01

*0.01 level of significance

The above table 4.7 shows the mean difference of the teachers of experimental group in

pre-test, there is no difference between teachers having above 10 years of experience and below

10 years in pre-test of experimental group in their mean scores in pre-test. So the hypothesis is

accepted. It is concluded that the knowledge and implementation skill of the male and female

teachers are same in pre-test towards learning analysis and school based assessment.
Figure 4.7 Mean difference of the teachers in pre-test of control group with relate to their years

of experience

80
71.27 73.22
70

60

50

40 MEAN
SD
30

20

10 7.22 6.81

0
Above 10 years Below 10 years
Hypothesis 8:

There will be significant difference between post-test mean scores of control group and

experimental group of teachers in their knowledge and skill in implementation of LA in SBA.

Investigator tends to find out the difference in scores obtained by the teachers on learning

content in the pre and post-test.

Table 4.8

Mean difference of the teachers in control group and experimental group in post test

Category N MEAN SD P* value

Control group 30 44.25 4.69

0.261
Experimental group 30 73.13 7.81

*0.01 level of significance

The calculated value of the control and experimental group teachers shown in the table

4.8, there is difference between control and experimental group teachers in their mean scores in

post-test. So the hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the teachers of experimental group

have gained the knowledge and implementation skill learning analysis and school based

assessment through workshop.

Figure 4.8 Mean difference of the teachers in control group and experimental group

80
73.13
70
60
50 44.25
40 MEAN
4.69 SD
30 7.81
20
10 SD
0
Control group MEAN
Experimental group
Hypothesis 9:

There is no significant difference between male and female teachers in post-test of

experimental group in their knowledge and skill in implementation of LA in SBA.

Table 4.9

Mean difference of the teachers in male and female teachers in post-test of experimental group

GENDER N MEAN SD P* value

FEMALE 17 74.81 3.89

0.01
MALE 13 72.33 4.55

*0.01 level of significance

The above table 4.9 shows the mean difference of the teachers of experimental group in

post-test, there is no difference between male and female teachers in control group teachers in

their mean scores in pre-test. So the hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the knowledge

and implementation skill of the male and female teachers are same in pre-test towards learning

analysis and school based assessment.

Figure 4.9 Mean difference of the teachers in male and female teachers in post-test of

experimental group

74.81 72.33
80

70

60

50
MEAN
40 SD
30

20
3.89 4.55
10

0
FEMALE MALE
Hypothesis 10:

There is no significant difference between rural and urban teachers in post-test of

experimental group in their knowledge and skill in implementation of LA in SBA.

Table 4.10 Mean difference of the teachers in rural and urban teachers in post-test of

experimental group

Location N MEAN SD P* value

73.16 6.22
RURAL 19
0.01
74.33 5.88
URBAN 11

*0.01 level of significance

The above table 4.10 shows the mean difference of the teachers of experimental group in

post-test, there is no difference between male and female teachers in control group teachers in

their mean scores in post-test. So the hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that the knowledge

and implementation skill of the male and female teachers are same in pre-test towards learning

analysis and school based assessment.

Figure 4.10 Mean difference of the teachers in rural and urban teachers in post-test of control

group

80 73.16
74.33
70
60
50
40 MEAN
6.22 SD
30
5.88
20
10 SD
0

RURAL MEAN
URBAN
Hypothesis 11:

There is no significant difference between teachers having above 10 years of experience and

below 10 years in post-test of experimental group in their knowledge and skill in

implementation of LA in SBA.

Table 4.11: Mean difference of the teachers in post-test of experimental group with relate to

their years of experience

Experience N MEAN SD P* value

Above 10 years 13 71.27 7.22

0.011
Below 10 years 17 73.22 6.81

*0.01 level of significance

The above table 4.11 shows the mean difference of the teachers of experimental group in

post-test, there is no difference between teachers having above 10 years of experience and below

10 years in post-test of experimental group in their mean scores in pre-test. So the hypothesis is

accepted. It is concluded that the knowledge and implementation skill of the teachers are same in

pre-test towards learning analysis and school based assessment.

Figure 4.11 Mean difference of the teachers in pre-test of control group with relate to their years

of experience

80 71.27 73.22
70
60
50
40 MEAN
7.22 SD
30
6.81
20
10 SD
0
Above 10 years MEAN
Below 10 years
Hypothesis 12:

There is no significant difference between post-test mean scores of control group and

experimental group of teachers in their knowledge and skill in implementation of LA in SBA

with relate to following dimensions

 Knowledge in fundamentals of learning analytics

 Skill of implementation of school based assessment

 Feasibility in implementation of LA in school based assessment

 Learning analytics in Learning support

 Data aspects – comparability, efficiency and transparency

Table 4. 12: Difference between post-test mean scores of control group and experimental group

with relate to different dimensions

Experimental group
Control group (N=30)
Dimensions (N=30)
Mean S.D Mean S.D
Knowledge in fundamentals of learning
analytics 35.01 7.22 71.25 4.69

Skill of implementation of school based

assessment 33.44 6.92 73.13 4.11

Feasibility in implementation of LA in
school based assessment 32.87 6.11 72.88 5.02

Learning analytics in Learning support 34.61 7.89 74.01 4.56

Data aspects – comparability, efficiency

and transparency 36.18 5.85 72.44 5.37
 The above table (12) shows the difference in mean scores of the teachers between pre-test

and post-test in different dimensions. The teachers gained the knowledge and skill of

implementation of learning analytics tools in classroom and school based assessment in different

dimensions such as Knowledge in fundamentals of learning analytics, Skill of implementation of

school based assessment, Feasibility in implementation of LA in school based assessment,

Learning analytics in Learning support and Data aspects – comparability, efficiency and

transparency. The results indicated that the teachers are gained the skill in all dimensions, the p

value depicted that huge difference between control group and experimental group in various

dimensions.

Figure 4. 12: Difference between post-test mean scores of control group and experimental group

with relate to different dimensions

71.25 73.13 72.88 74.01

80 72.44
60
35.01
40 33.44
32.87 34.61 36.18
20
0

Control group Experimental group

Hypothesis 13:

The constructive implementation process of LA and SBA will be arrived through focus group

discussion with relate to following dimensions

The main findings from data generated by the focus group discussions are summarized

below.

In order to understand whether the students are really benefiting from the teaching and

that they are able to retain the information, there has to be some visible evidence. This is where

data-based learning analytics can be leveraged. Enterprises have been utilizing data based

learning analytics for a long time to make smart business decisions and increase their

profitability. It is time that the education sector also adapts this technique to improve the

knowledge delivery and learning process. Plus, today we’ve got efficient learning analytics tools

to collect and process the data with accuracy.

The consultation brought about valuable information also in terms of current technology

in student assessments and the inclusion of innovative strategies in it. In terms of

implementation of learning analytics tools used in assessment and interpretation purpose,

essentially positive feedback was received on the concept of LA. Similarly, teachers are accepted

the existence of sorting errors and lack of pictorial representation of results may be affected the

reproduction of the results in future perspective. Overall the teachers are agreed with the tools

and materials proposed in present study for analyzing the learning outcome of the students in

various level of evaluation.

The main concerns raised with regards to the conditions in present school environment,

simply put, learning analytics is the collection of data about a student’s academic performance,
and analyzing it to derive trends and patterns that reveal areas which need improvement. One of

the main reasons why educational institutes use learning analytics tools is to find out potential

problem areas of each student and take timely action to address them.

By looking at a detailed learner analytics report, teachers can identify certain patterns.

For example, all students are performing really well in one particular chapter, which could mean

that they have understood this chapter well enough. Or you might find that students are spending

too much time on one subject, which could mean either it’s an important subject or that they are

finding it difficult to understand.

Now with this data, teachers can design an effective teaching plan. They can figure out if

a certain topic needs to be revised or redesigned so as to make it simpler for the students. Or

whether extra attention needs to be given to the student who is seen having trouble with a topic.

Thus, analytics can help teachers to design an easy-to-understand course module and devise an

effective teaching plan.

In terms of security, the main issue raised was connection between teaching and learning

and Track Students Who Are Academically Weak, with detailed insight into the performance of

each student, teachers can identify students who are failing to complete the lessons on time or

those students who require multiple attempts to clear a test. When the performance results of a

few students are poorer than the rest of the class, it is an indication that the student is unable to

cope with the pace of the course or that s/he is not able to grasp the concepts properly. Thus find

out students who are at risk of failing in an exam. By paying some extra attention to these

students, you can ensure that they do not drop out of school and that they score a good

percentage in their exams.

 The availability of technology tools in assessment process at the classroom and school

level and the knowledge and skill of the teachers are able to utilize those tools effectively are

relatively frequent question emerged in discussion Teachers can use the analytics report to view

the learning pattern of each student, and accordingly draft a lesson plan to aid them in their

studies. Instructors can recommend or assign additional resources for students, which will

eventually help them understand the topics better. Thus, a teacher can provide customized

learning plans to each student based on their strengths and weaknesses. This is an effective way

to ensure that every student is being encouraged to learn to the best of their abilities.

Earlier, the only way to measure a student’s performance and understanding was by way

of assessments. Little did it matter whether the students are learning by rote or if they really

understood what they are reading, as scoring high marks in class was given more importance.

But now, with more emphasis on understanding concepts rather than rote learning, educators

want to ensure that the knowledge delivery is effective and is helping the students to learn, and

most importantly, retain the information.

Learning analytics report will gives complete view of the student’s performance

throughout the year. Teachers can compare between the start of the term till the current term and

see the changes in their scores and learning activity. This will give them an idea of the areas

where the students’ performance has improved and where it still needs improvement. The

teachers can then prepare an action plan according to this analysis.

Hence, teachers must ensure that students are receiving valuable and useful training

through the workshop conducted by the investigator for this study. An analytics-driven K-12

education will make students more competent, helping them acquire lifelong learning skills.
Incorporating learning analytics into K-12 education can help derive actionable information to

improve the course module and enhance the learning experience of the students.

4.4 Conclusion

Learning analytics report will gives a complete view of the student’s performance

throughout the year. Teachers can compare between the start of the term till the current term and

see the changes in their scores and learning activity. In this chapter, the analyses of pre-test and

post-test scores of the teachers in gained knowledge and skill in practicing learning analytics in

various assessments has done, interpretation have been made and conclusions drawn. The

summary of the study, findings and suggestions for the further study find a place in the next

chapter.