Can theory-driven learning analytics dashboard enhance human-AI collaboration in writing learning? Insights from an empirical experiment

TL;DR

This study investigates whether a theory-driven learning analytics dashboard can improve human-AI collaboration in writing tasks by enhancing knowledge, self-regulation, and dialogue quality, based on an empirical experiment with postgraduate students.

Contribution

It introduces a novel LAD grounded in SRL theory that effectively improves writing knowledge and self-regulation skills in human-AI collaborative learning environments.

Findings

LAD led to higher writing knowledge gains.

LAD improved self-regulated learning skills.

Participants experienced increased cognitive load and test anxiety.

Abstract

The integration of Generative AI (GenAI) into education has raised concerns about over-reliance and superficial learning, particularly in writing tasks in higher education. This study explores whether a theory-driven learning analytics dashboard (LAD) can enhance human-AI collaboration in the academic writing task by improving writing knowledge gains, fostering self-regulated learning (SRL) skills and building different human-AI dialogue characteristics. Grounded in Zimmerman's SRL framework, the LAD provided real-time feedback on learners' goal-setting, writing processes and reflection, while monitoring the quality of learner-AI interactions. A quasi-experiment was conducted involving 52 postgraduate students divided into an experimental group (EG) using the LAD to a control group (CG) without it in a human-AI collaborative writing task. Pre- and post- knowledge tests, questionnaires measuring SRL and cognitive load, and students' dialogue data with GenAI were collected and analyzed. Results showed that the EG achieved significantly higher writing knowledge gains and improved SRL skills, particularly in self-efficacy and cognitive strategies. However, the EG also reported increased test anxiety and cognitive load, possibly due to heightened metacognitive awareness. Epistemic Network Analysis revealed that the EG engaged in more reflective, evaluative interactions with GenAI, while the CG focused on more transactional and information-seeking exchanges. These findings contribute to the growing body of literature on the educational use of GenAI and highlight the importance of designing interventions that complement GenAI tools, ensuring that technology enhances rather than undermines the learning process.