A SoLAR primer that frames learning analytics as data about learners and learning, interpreted for teaching and learning action. Best before using the matrix because it clarifies the field-level purpose.
Open on YouTubeEducation Data x Analysis Guide Matrix
A practical onboarding guide for mapping educational technology and learning-sciences data to defensible analyses, claim verbs, research genres, and reviewer checks before the first model is run.
Evidence-to-claim map
LMS events, attempts, dwell time
prediction
process mining
chat, posts, talk turns
NLP
network models
gaze, posture, physiology
time series
classification
condition, fidelity, outcomes
ITS
SCED
This is a data-to-claim guide, not a statistics menu
Educational data are produced by platforms, tasks, learners, teachers, sensors, institutions, and researchers. The same dataset can support a descriptive claim, a process claim, a measurement claim, or a prediction claim, but not all at once and not without different evidence burdens.
Name the data type and decide what kind of claim it can support.
Map data sources to method families and reviewer-safe claim language.
A defensible analysis plan, not just a list of popular techniques.
Watch the field before choosing a method
These videos fit the guide's central topic: how educational data become learning analytics, educational data mining, and learning-sciences evidence. Use them as conceptual anchors before moving into the matrix.
A practical EDM overview focused on how logs and platform data can be analyzed to understand learning behavior, prediction, and improvement. Pair it with the trace, sequence, and prediction rows.
Open on YouTubeA SoLAR LASI panel connecting analytics with learning-sciences questions. This is the best fit for remembering that data analysis must preserve theory, context, and learning mechanisms.
Open on YouTubeChoose a data type, claim verb, and analysis family
The selector gives a first-pass diagnosis. It does not approve a study; it tells you what to inspect before writing the method section.
Survey and self-report data
BoundedTwelve data families cover most education and learning-sciences projects
Methods preserve different parts of the phenomenon
Summaries, dashboards, distributions, heatmaps, and temporal plots. Best for pattern visibility.
Supervised models with leakage-free validation, calibration, and subgroup checks.
Reliability, IRT/Rasch, cognitive diagnosis, validity arguments, and evidence-centered design.
Sequence mining, TNA, ONA, process mining, Markov models, and HMMs.
Qualitative coding, NLP, embeddings, discourse moves, argumentation, and LLM-assisted coding with validation.
Social networks, two-mode networks, epistemic networks, centrality, community detection, and group structure.
Synchronization, feature extraction, early/late fusion, alignment, and triangulation across streams.
RCT, QED, RD, ITS, SCED, DiD, and causal models only when the design carries the claim.
Joint displays, explanatory sequential, convergent integration, and meta-inferences.
Data type often points to the paper genre
Make the matrix explorable, not just readable
These are lightweight visualization patterns that can turn a methods guide into a more playful research-planning tool. Each pattern keeps the same discipline: the visual must reveal a data-to-method-to-claim relationship, not decorate it.
Evidence river
Design rule: readers should be able to click a data source and immediately see which methods and claims become safer or riskier.
Common objections by claim type
If your claim is about engagement
Do not treat clicks, dwell time, facial expression, or log volume as direct engagement without a construct argument and triangulation or validation evidence.
If your claim is predictive
Show held-out validation or honest cross-validation, outcome timing, leakage checks, calibration, and subgroup performance.
If your claim is causal
Name the design feature that supports causal interpretation: randomization, quasi-experimental equivalence, regression discontinuity, interrupted time series, single-case design, or another credible strategy.
If your claim is about collaboration
Counts of posts, replies, or centrality do not automatically indicate collaboration quality. Tie definitions and discourse meaning must be visible.
If your claim integrates multiple sources
Multiple data streams do not automatically triangulate. State exactly where logs, text, video, sensors, surveys, or outcomes inform one another.
Five quick mappings
Build this guide through a research conversation with an AI coding agent
The fastest workflow is not to ask for a finished webpage in one sentence. Treat Claude Code or Codex as a research assistant, editor, designer, and publisher, but keep the evidence rules explicit at every step.
Ask the agent to define the audience, data families, claim verbs, and reviewer risks before writing UI code.
Have it collect primary references and remove any citation it cannot verify.
Request an English GitHub Pages page with interactive selectors, visual ideas, downloads, and thumbnail metadata.
Make the agent test JavaScript, inspect the rendered DOM, commit, push, and report the public URL.
Start with the research brief
Prompt an AI assistant to build the matrix before analysis
Starter files for teams and agents
Foundational and checked sources
Show references
- Baker, R. S. J. d., & Yacef, K. (2009). The state of educational data mining in 2009: A review and future visions. Journal of Educational Data Mining. https://jedm.educationaldatamining.org/index.php/JEDM/article/view/8
- Blikstein, P., & Worsley, M. (2016). Multimodal learning analytics and education data mining: Using computational technologies to measure complex learning tasks. Journal of Learning Analytics. https://learning-analytics.info/index.php/JLA/article/view/4613
- Calvet Linan, L., & Juan Perez, A. A. (2015). Educational data mining and learning analytics: Differences, similarities, and time evolution. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. https://educationaltechnologyjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.7238/rusc.v12i3.2515
- Goldhammer, F., Hahnel, C., Kroehne, U., & Zehner, F. (2021). From byproduct to design factor: On validating the interpretation of process indicators based on log data. Large-scale Assessments in Education. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40536-021-00113-5
- Hu, L., & Chen, G. (2021). A systematic review of visual representations for analyzing collaborative discourse. Educational Research Review. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X21000269
- Kaliisa, R., Rienties, B., Morch, A., & Kluge, A. (2022). Social learning analytics in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers and Education Open. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666557322000015
- Mu, S., Cui, M., & Huang, X. (2020). Multimodal data fusion in learning analytics: A systematic review. Sensors. https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/20/23/6856
- Samuelsen, J., Chen, W., & Wasson, B. (2019). Integrating multiple data sources for learning analytics: Review of literature. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41039-019-0105-4
- SoLAR. (n.d.). What is learning analytics? https://www.solaresearch.org/about/what-is-learning-analytics/
- SoLAR. (2020). Learning analytics in a nutshell. https://youtu.be/XscUZ8dIa-8
- SoLAR. (2014). LASI14 panel: Learning analytics and learning science. https://youtu.be/gR7FKMzzbOc
- eSchool News. (2017). Educational Data Mining (EDM): Turning big data into big gains for students. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEWBdf1dvdw
- Winne, P. H. (2020). Construct and consequential validity for learning analytics based on trace data. Computers in Human Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106457