Search

This Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) case study is part of theIA2030Movement’sKnowledge-to-Action Hub.Learn more about the Hub…Learn more about the Movement… This report is part of series aiming to capture the perspectives of a diverse group of health practitioners working to deliver or manage immunization services in low- and middle-income countries.Contributing to consultative engagement between international and local levels, each report offers a unique opportunity to discover unfiltered experiences and insights from thousands of people whose daily lives revolve around delivering immunization services. Background This report provides an overview of fourteen weeks of experience sharing sessions organized by TGLF for the 6185 health professionals who joined a four-month programme known as the “Full Learning Cycle” (FLC) intended to support learning and change. Throughout this programme, participants had the opportunity to meet four times per week (twice in French, twice in English) to problem-solve their immunization challenges through experience sharing, using the Immunization Training Challenge Hackathon (ITCH) pedagogical pattern developed by TGLF. A total of 44 Peer support sessions were organized; 22 for the English cohort and 22 for the French cohort. Two experience sharing sessions were organized per language each week with an average attendance of 60 participants per session. This report seeks to capture the value created through the experiences shared during these sessions, both key lessons to improve immunization practice as well as what participants gained from engaging in a methodology that recognizes the value of their lived experience as immunization practitioners. Methods All the sessions took place synchronously via Zoom. Sessions were recorded and summaries of experiences shared by participants as well as key takeaways were prepared by the session facilitators, usually at the end of each week. The first part of this report captures specific experiences shared during the sessions at each stage of the Full Learning Cycle (FLC) around certain recurring themes like COVID-19 vaccine uptake, improving immunization coverage, tackling vaccine hesitancy, vaccine confidence, immunization financing, improving measles vaccination coverage in response to outbreaks, effective vaccine management and new vaccine introduction. The second part showcases key learnings that could help participants and challenge owners to resolve their immunization challenges, grouped by the recurring themes that were the focus of most sessions. Some challenges can be country and local area or community specific, demonstrating how solutions tend to be dependent on local context. Nevertheless, beyond sharing individual solutions, experience sharing provides opportunities to practice giving and receiving feedback, learning how to evaluate local challenges, practices, and solutions, and thinking through how they may or may not be adapted or transferable to one’s own context. The last part will focus on the perceived value of these experience sharing sessions to participants. Throughout the FLC, members of the Movement for Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) were asked to share on a weekly basis how they were doing as members of the IA2030 Movement and how/what in their participation was helping their professional practice through a simple form. As of August 2022, this form had registered 10,092 responses (5600 in English and 4492 in French). The form has a set of 5 evidence-based questions focusing on the impact of participation on their professional practice. While these questions were not limited to the experience sharing sessions but to all the other activities/events that were part of the programme a good number of respondents shared the impact participating in the experience sharing sessions had on them and on their professional practice. A qualitative analysis of the responses was used to capture what participants had to say about the value of the experience sharing sessions. TGLF wishes to recognize all of the participants who shared their challenges and experience. Key findings To every challenge there is a potential solution: For all the challenges shared during the experience sharing sessions, there was always at least one member who had encountered or was encountering the same challenge and had carried out measures to resolve it. Some of the solutions were context-specific, but it most cases, the challenge owner could adopt and adapt this idea or practice to their context. Experience sharing adds value to peer learning by creating a platform for knowledge transfer through the sharing of concrete and practical stories that are making a difference in other contexts. Members of the Movement for IA2030 shared that by listening to others’ experiences was and many reported an improvement in their skill sets as far as immunization is concerned. Experience sharing helps build confidence and motivation. Members were able to identify themselves in the challenges and experiences shared and this helped them to realize that they were not alone; that the challenges they faced were shared by others elsewhere. Also, being in a position to help others through experience sharing was a motivating factor for some members.

Every year, all kinds of practitioners help to deliver around 400 million shots to infants, adolescents and adults in every country on Earth. This is a tribute to those whose efforts save millions of lives every year. Immunization can sometimes seem to be fixated on numbers. Conversations are dominated by coverage rates, the numbers of zero-dose children, the numbers of new vaccine introductions. Every July, global immunization data are published and pored over in great detail. But immunization isn’t really about numbers. It’s about people. It’s about the infants being protected against killer infectious diseases, adolescent girls being spared the threat of cervical cancer, people of all ages escaping the worst impacts of COVID-19. And it’s about the countless people in every country who work tirelessly to get vaccines to those who need them, wherever they are. The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) called on Members of the Movement for Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) to“show how your daily work makes a difference in protecting children and their families from vaccine-preventable diseases”. More than 1000 photos were submitted during World Immunization Week (25–29 April 2022) by IA2030 Movement members working with communities in nearly 60 countries. Each picture does not just tell a story. It also provides an opportunity to learn about the“how”of immunization Each picture does not just tell a story. It also provides an opportunity to learn about the“how”of immunization, which requires health professionals to connect with the communities they serve. Immunization means bringing families into health systems, a health professional meeting and speaking with a parent or caretaker, a child being assessed during its early vulnerable life, then finally vaccines administered to prevent illness and death. And it’s happening more than 400 million times each year. Regardless of gender, wealth or ethnicity, and in some of the most challenging circumstances imaginable. These pictures reflect a tiny percentage of those 400 million individual events and the enormous commitment of health professionals, people, communities and governments necessary to make that happen each year. Collectively, they provide insights into the everyday experience of immunization practitioners: what it actually takes to deliver vaccines to populations – a monumental effort undertaken every year for each new birth cohort. It’s worth remembering that, globally, immunization services still reach more people than any other health service. There are cold chains to manage, distribution systems to organize, community outreach sessions to run, records to keep and analyse. The pictures are a reminder of the many different roles that need to be fulfilled. Immunization programmes depend on the coordinated activities of vaccinators, supervisors, cold chain managers, community mobilizers, researchers and multiple others, all of whom are essential cogs in the immunization machinery. The photos provide a vivid picture of what immunization means in practice The photos provide a vivid picture of what immunization means in practice: what a community immunization session looks like; what a health facility session looks like; what environmental challenges really look like. Some show the seldom reported practicalities of immunization: the finger marking, the paperwork, the ice boxes on motorbikes. But often it is the incidental detail that is revealing: the rubble in an insecure area; the damaged ceiling of a health facility; the vaccinators’footwear; the sheer numbers of people attending sessions. What shines through is the sense of pride and commitment of health workers Yet what always emerges is the humanity of recipient and provider: the smiling faces of the children whose future is being protected, the protectiveness of parents and other caregivers. And, above all, what shines through is the sense of pride and commitment of health workers, who every day are doing their utmost to ensure that vaccines are where they need to be and that people want to receive them. People who are vaccinated, and people who deliver vaccines, are not numbers. Each is an individual whose life is worth protecting and whose efforts to help others need recognizing. When the next set of immunization data are released, it is worth reflecting what they truly mean for people in need and the people striving to meet that need. Where to see the complete collection The complete collection of IA2030 Movement photo stories can beviewed on Instagram. An inauguration event for the photo stories was held on 17 June 2022at Teach to Reach: Connect 6. It can be viewed on YouTube. The IA2030 Movement During 2022, 6185 health professionals from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) applied to join the “Movement for Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030)” and participated in a four-month programme of digitally enabled peer learning events. Focusing on a specific local priority challenge, participants undertook a structured five-stage process: Initiation: Committing to the Movement and completing an application survey Ideas generation: Sharing ideas with global peers Situational analysis: Undertaking a systematic analysis of the causes of their challenge Action planning: Developing an action plan, reviewed by peers Impact accelerator: A four-week project kick-start with weekly milestones. Programme participants (“Scholars”) will spend the next 6–12 months completing their projects, periodically reporting back on progress. This Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) Listening and Learning Report is part of theIA2030Movement’sKnowledge-to-Action Hub.Learn more about the Hub…Learn more about the Movement&hellip

Multiple factors affect health worker performance and, by extension, immunization programme performance. For example, health worker motivation is often seen to be key to programme performance. A less well studied factor with potential impact on programme performance is organizational learning culture – the capacity of the work environment to support learning and change. Evidence-based instruments to assess organizational learning culture have been applied in a wide range of public-sector and private-sector settings, and have shown a correlation between a supportive learning culture and organizational performance. However, these instruments have not yet been applied in immunization. An application form used to recruit participants for the 2022 Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) peer learning programme organized by the Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) provided an opportunity to explore questions related to motivation, workplace learning culture and perceptions of immunization programme performance within lowand middle-income countries (LMICs). This report is part of series aiming to capture the perspectives of a diverse group of health practitioners working to deliver or manage immunization services in low- and middle-income countries.Contributing to consultative engagement between international and local levels, each report offers a unique opportunity to discover unfiltered experiences and insights from thousands of people whose daily lives revolve around delivering immunization services. This Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) publication is part of theIA2030Movement’sKnowledge-to-Action Hub.Learn more about the Hub…Learn more about the Movement&hellip

This report is part of series aiming to capture the perspectives of a diverse group of health practitioners working to deliver or manage immunization services in low- and middle-income countries.Contributing to consultative engagement between international and local levels, each report offers a unique opportunity to discover unfiltered experiences and insights from thousands of people whose daily lives revolve around delivering immunization services. A total of 6185 healthcare workers wishing to take part in the IA2030-focused peer learning programme run by the Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF) in 2022 completed an online application form, part of which asked them to identify the most difficult and important challenge they faced. Responses provided by the first 2000 applicants (1000 English-speaking, 1000 French-speaking) were mapped onto IA2030 strategic priority and key focus areas. For the most popular key focus areas, responses were subcategorized to provide more granular insights into the nature of priority challenges as perceived by applicants. Key findings Reported challenges most commonly fell into the following four IA2030 key areas of focus: 2.5 Knowledge (used to capture all challenges related to community demand and hesitation) 1.4 Supply chain 3.1 Reaching disadvantaged populations, particularly remote rural communities 1.3 Human resources Demand and hesitation challenges were by far the mostly commonly cited, accounting for around a quarter of all the challenges referenced. More granular coding identified lack of knowledge or understanding of vaccination’s benefits (or actions to address these issues) as the aspect of hesitation and demand thought to be most significant. In particular, hesitancy was identified as a major factor affecting COVID-19 vaccination, with myths and misperceptions seen to be having a major impact on take up. Conclusions An analysis of the key challenges identified by 2000 immunization programme staff from low- and middle-income countries has identified widespread concerns about low levels of demand and substantial vaccine hesitancy in communities. The causes of this hesitancy are frequently perceived to be limited knowledge or understanding of the benefits of vaccination. At the global level, recent years have seen growing emphasis on social and behavioural drivers of immunization-related behaviours as key factors in vaccination take up, including the development of a WHO position paper on understanding the behavioural and social drivers of vaccine uptake published in May 2022. Lack of knowledge is not included in the core framework of this position paper, given the lack of evidence that this is a significant factor in low take up. These findings therefore suggest a mismatch between global approaches to demand/hesitancy and the perceptions and actions of country-level practitioners in low- and middle-income countries, which focus primarily on closing perceived gaps in knowledge. The results do not imply that lack of knowledge is truly the biggest demand-related challenge in low-resource settings, and consultation with caregivers and communities could reveal a different picture. However, the findings do provide insight into health workers’ perceptions, which will be critical in shaping their choice of response. The results highlight the need for further investigation of demand-related attitudes among practitioners, and how these affect local demand-creation strategies, as well as of knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of caretakers in low-resource settings. Given the relative lack of data, they also emphasize the need for further work on the design of appropriate demand-creation approaches in low-resource settings, particularly given the potential impacts of COVID-19-related hesitancy on take up of essential immunization services. This Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) case study is part of theIA2030Movement’sKnowledge-to-Action Hub.Learn more about the Hub…Learn more about the Movement… &nbsp

The peer learning platform managed by the Geneva Learning Foundation (LinkedIn | YouTube | Twitter | Podcast) provides a platform for engaging with frontline staff from all levels of immunization systems in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) case study analyzes the platform’s potential relevancefor IA2030 consultative engagement. Key features include: (1) Opportunities for in-depth engagement on priority topics with staff directly responsible for managing and delivering services; (2)insights into the raw, unfiltered perspectives of frontline staff through analysis of project plans and implementation reports; and (3) opportunities to strike up meaningful dialogue and to give a voice to frontline workers, especially those in LMICs. “The inputs and points raised by panelists and the audience really were very insightful, actual experiences, opportunities, challenges and enablers on the topic of safeguarding and strengthening routine immunization during COVID-19 vaccine rollout.” – Dr Folake Olayinka,Chair, IA2030 Working Group 1 The peer learning model aims to exploit the power of digital technology, bringing health staff working on primary health care and immunization together to share experience and to learn from each other, with a focus on solving the issues that are of most importance where they work. Participation helps to generate more motivated, energized and better-connected staff able to make a greater contribution to the performance of national immunization programmes and health systems more widely. More than this, Scholars have shown themselves to be enthusiastic contributors, both during and after participation in learning interventions. They therefore offer a unique opportunity for the regional and global immunization and PHC community to hear first-hand about frontline challenges and how they are being overcome, and to involve immunization staff from all levels in the co-development of strategies and implementation plans to advance IA2030. This Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) case study is part of the IA2030Movement’sKnowledge-to-Action Hub.Learn more about the Hub…Learn more about the Movement&hellip

This Immunization Agenda 2030 (IA2030) Listening and Learning Report is part of theIA2030Movement’sKnowledge-to-Action Hub.Learn more about the Hub…Learn more about the Movement… The Immunization Agenda (IA2030), the global immunization strategy for 2021–2023, places countries at its heart. In line with this principle, it has identified “consultative engagement” as a critical aspect of the work of the 13 IA2030 Working Groups. The purpose of such engagement is to provide country-level input into global deliberations and policymaking, to identify the priority challenges facing immunization workers on the frontline and in ministries of health, and to identify potential solutions to these challenges that could be disseminated more widely. IA2030 is intended to be a flexible strategy that responds to changing contexts and opportunities. Effective consultative engagement may be an important way in which to ensure that IA2030 evolves in response to changing frontline challenges. How best to undertake consultative engagement remains an unanswered question. One possibility is to take advantage of the peer learning platform organized by the Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF), which facilitates peer learning among healthcare workers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Participants in TGLF courses (“Scholars”) identify priority local challenges, perform situational analysis (including field visits), exchange and comment ideas and practices with their peers, and come together in online forums over the course of six months to discuss their experiences and offer each other advice as they begin to implement action plans. In 2021, Wellcome funded TGLF to recruit two learning cohorts focused on IA2030 and to explore with project partner Bridges to Development and the IA2030 Working Groups potential approaches to consultative engagement. In addition, a 2021 cohort of Scholars undertaking a WHO Scholar Level 1 certification course chose challenges and developed action plans structured around IA2030 strategic priorities. This interim learning report summarizes progress to date, focusing on 2021 Scholars selecting IA2030 strategic priority 1 (SP1), immunization programmes for primary health care and universal health coverage, and IA2030 Working Group 1 (WG1), whose remit covers SP1. This report summarizes four pieces of work carried out in partnership with WG1: A quantitative analysis of Scholars and their choice of IA2030 strategic priority and, within SP1, their choice of key area of focus. A thematic analysis of the action plans developed by Scholars, to shed light on priority issues identified by national immunization staff and approaches being taken to address them. A thematic case study on safeguarding existing immunization services during COVID-19 vaccine rollout, based on virtual discussion events. “First person” case studies of individual Scholars and their projects, to provide a deeper dive into specific LMIC contexts. The first cohort comprised 551 Scholars, 256 from anglophone countries and 295 from francophone countries. Most were based in sub-Saharan Africa, 34% were female and all levels of immunization programmes were represented. Scholars were requested to select one IA2030 strategic priority to focus on, based on their local context and priorities. SP1 was selected by 105/551 (19%) of Scholars, making it the third most popular strategic priority. Each strategic priority is divided into multiple, more specific key focus areas (KFAs), and Scholars were requested to base their actions plans on three KFAs, again based on their local context and priorities. Within SP1, KFA1.3 (health workforce) and KFA1.1 (immunization in primary healthcare) were the most frequently selected key focus areas. This interim report covers a relatively short period, so conclusions should be taken as provisional. Nevertheless, reflection on early experience highlights some key points. Activities and outputs Thematic analysis of action plans has identified some of the priority issues facing Scholars and the approaches being taken to address them. Understanding of IA2030 is mixed, with many Scholars simply framing their activities within the IA2030 structure, not always accurately. An analysis of the eight SP1 key focus areas found that the first, KFA1 (Immunization for primary healthcare) was often used as a “catch all” for a general focus on immunization programme function; for the other key focus areas, action plans tended to align more closely with key focus area themes. It is notable that, even after decades of immunization programme development within primary healthcare systems, fundamental immunization programme “basics” – such as cold chain infrastructure, the health workforce, leadership, health information systems – are still seen by frontline health workers as key constraints on immunization programme performance. An analysis of three key cross-cutting areas – community engagement, use of new technology and gender-related issues – provided a wealth of insight into local challenges and strategies being adopted to address them. Thematic online discussion events were successfully organized, were well attended by Scholars, alumni and other stakeholders, and prompted extensive sharing of information. The resulting thematic case study on safeguarding essential immunization services during COVID-19 vaccine rollout has identified some of the ways that this twin challenge has been addressed. Individual case studies provide a “deep dive” into specific contexts, helping to bring to life specific issues and activities. These case studies also have the potential to stimulate further dialogue as living documents. Specific issues discussed include: Using COVID-19 vaccine responses to strengthen existing immunization systems (Ghana). Applying nationwide an approach to community engagement successfully used in conflict-affected regions (Cameroon). Promoting use of equity-based microplanning to improve coverage in hard-to-reach populations (Democratic Republic of the Congo). Focusing on core immunization programme functions at the district level to improve coverage in resource-poor settings (Sierra Leone). Consultative engagement and Working Group involvement Scholars and alumni have proven enthusiastic contributors to engagement activities, including production of case studies. The project has been mindful not to overload Scholars and has endeavoured to ensure that cohorts also benefit from engagement activities, for example through their exposure to global-level experts. Engagement with Working Groups has not always been straightforward, although WG1 has been an enthusiastic “pathfinder” and engagement with other Working Groups for learning cycles 2 and 3 has begun. Possible explanations include: Uncertainty among some Working Groups about the value of consultative engagement, whether it is worthwhile, and what form it should take. The novelty of the method of engagement, through an ongoing programme of peer learning events, which has taken some Working Group members outside their comfort zone. Heavy demands on Working Group members, which limit the time they have to contribute to the project. Lack of familiarity with the complex TGLF model, which creates a significant learning curve. The need to integrate engagement activities within existing TGLF processes, which limits some potential mechanisms of engagement. Managing large volumes of data, much of which reflects “raw” insights from front-line health workers; this is intended to be shared with relevant Working Groups but sharing, analysing and making sense of the data raises some practical and resourcing challenges. Later in the project, conversations will be held with Working Groups to gather feedback on the value of the peer learning platform for consultative engagement, which outputs and analytical activities have been most useful, and how the potential usefulness of the platform for consultative engagement could best be realized. Discussions are continuing with WG1 to develop the case studies into living documents and with WGs 3, 4 and the Data Working Group to co-design engagement activities for the 2022 learning cycles. This will include a discussion on the usefulness of the case studies produced to date and this interim learning report, to shape further engagement activities.&nbsp

Recent development of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOcs) commenced unprecedented interest of the general public. To leverage from attention given to MOOCs, understanding of public discourse is essential, as it can give critical insights into the important domains of biggest societal interests. Previous research showed the great need for understanding specifics of MOOC adoption around the world and the necessity to better cater to the needs of different markets. With this in mind, this paper presents study that looked specifically at the Europe-related MOOC discourse between 2008 and 2015. We identified important themes in the MOOC public discourse and evaluated their changes over time. Further implications of our findings are also discussed.

The creation of machine learning-based predictive models of student success has risen as a central activity in the fields of artificial intelligence in education, learning analytics, and educational data mining. Fueled by the high availability of data on learner interactions with technology, as well as the broad availability of computational methods to deal with these data, predictive modeling in education tends to have a lesser emphasis on producing learning theories and causal interpretations of data and a greater emphasis on predicting accurate coarse-grained learning outcomes for individual students. This chapter presents an overview of the common data sources, discusses the recent developments, and identifies the critical issues in predictive modeling of student success. Open challenges in the area include model explainability, fairness and bias in models, model generalizability and transfer to new circumstances, and the educational actionability of models.

The term Learner Profile has proliferated over the years, and more recently, with the increased advocacy around personalising learning experiences. Learner profiles are at the center of personalised learning, and the characterisation of diversity in classrooms is made possible by profiling learners based on their strengths and weaknesses, backgrounds and other factors influencing learning. In this paper, we discuss three common approaches of profiling learners based on students’ cognitive knowledge, skills and competencies and behavioral patterns, all latter commonly used within Learning Analytics (LA). Although each approach has its strengths and merits, there are also several disadvantages that have impeded adoption at scale. We propose that the broader adoption of learner profiles can benefit from careful combination of the methods and practices of three primary approaches, allowing for scalable implementation of learner profiles across educational systems. In this regard, LA can leverage from other aligned domains to develop valid and rigorous measures of students' learning and propel learner profiles from education research to more mainstream educational practice. LA could provide the scope for monitoring and reporting beyond an individualised context and allow holistic evaluations of progress. There is promise in LA research to leverage the growing momentum surrounding learner profiles and make a substantial impact on the field's core aim - understanding and optimising learning as it occurs. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Industry supervisors play a pivotal role in ongoing learner support and guidance within a work-integrated learning context. Effective provisional feedback from industry supervisors in work-integrated learning environments is essential for increasing a team's metacognitive awareness and ability to evaluate their performance. However, research that examines the usefulness and type of feedback from industry supervisors for teams remains limited. In this study, we investigate the quality of provisional feedback by comparing the teams' helpfulness rating of the feedback from two types of industry supervisors (i.e., clients and mentors), based on the feedback type (task, process, regulatory and self-level oriented) using learning analytics. The results show that teams rated the perceived helpfulness scores of clients and mentors as very useful, with mentors providing slightly more helpful feedback. We also found that mentors provide more co-occurrences of feedback classifications than clients. The overall results show that teams perceive mentor feedback as more helpful than clients and that the mentor targets feedback that is more beneficial to the teams learning than the clients. Our findings can aid in developing guidelines that aim to validate and improve existing or new feedback quality frameworks by leveraging backward evaluation data. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

The advent of technological developments is allowing to gather large amounts of data in several research fields. Learning analytics (LA)/educational data mining has access to big observational unstructured data captured from educational settings and relies mostly on unsupervised machine learning (ML) algorithms to make sense of such type of data. Generalized additive models for location, scale, and shape (GAMLSS) are a supervised statistical learning framework that allows modeling all the parameters of the distribution of the response variable with respect to the explanatory variables. This article overviews the power and flexibility of GAMLSS in relation to some ML techniques. Also, GAMLSS' capability to be tailored toward causality via causal regularization is briefly commented. This overview is illustrated via a data set from the field of LA. This article is categorized under: Application Areas > Education and Learning Algorithmic Development > Statistics Technologies > Machine Learning, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 13 (1)

This book integrates foundational ideas from psychology, immersive digital learning environments supported by theories and methods of the learning sciences, particularly in pursuit of questions of cognition, behavior and emotion factors in digital learning experiences. New and emerging foundations of theory and analysis based on observation of digital traces are enhanced by data science, particularly machine learning, with extensions to deep learning, natural language processing and artificial intelligence brought into service to better understand higher-order thinking capacities such as self-regulation, collaborative problem-solving and social construction of knowledge. As a result, this edited volume presents a collection of indicators or measurements focusing on learning processes and related behavior, (meta-)cognition, emotion and motivation, as well as social processes. In addition, each section of the book includes an invited commentary from a related field, such as educational psychology, cognitive science, learning science, etc.

One of the major factors affecting student learning is feedback. Although the importance of feedback has been recognized in educational institutions, dramatic changes - such as bigger class sizes and a more diverse student population - challenged the provision of effective feedback. In light of these changes, educators have increasingly been using new digital tools to provide student feedback, given the broader adoption and availability of these new technologies. However, despite these efforts, most educators have limited insight into the recipience of their feedback and wonder which students engage with feedback. This problem is referred to as the "feedback gap," which is the difference between the potential and actual use of feedback, preventing educators and instructional designers from understanding feedback recipience among students. In this study, a set of trackable call-to-action (CTA) links were embedded in feedback messages focused on learning processes and self-regulation of learning in one fully online marketing course and one blended bioscience course. These links helped us examine the association between feedback engagement and course success. We also conducted two focus groups with students from one of the courses to further examine student perceptions of feedback messages. Our results across both courses revealed that early engagement with feedback is positively associated with passing the course and that most students considered feedback messages helpful in their learning. Our study also found some interesting demographic differences between students regarding their engagement with the feedback messages. Such insight enables instructors to ask "why" questions, support students' learning, improve feedback processes, and narrow the gap between potential and actual use of feedback. The practical implications of our findings are further discussed.

Refereed/Peer-reviewed Over the past decade, the increasing use of learning analytics opened the possibility of making data-driven decisions for improving student learning. Driven by the strong university adoption of learning analytics, most early learning analytics research focused on issues specific to tertiary education. With the broader adoption of educational technologies in primary and secondary education and the emergence of new classroom-focused technologies, there has been a growing awareness of the potentials of learning analytics for supporting students and diagnosing their learning progress in pre-university contexts. This special section focused on investigating, developing, and evaluating state-of-the-art learning analytics approaches within primary and secondary school settings. In this editorial, we summarize the papers of the special section and discuss the challenges and opportunities for learning analytics within the school context. We conclude with the discussion around the opportunities for future work and the implications of this special section for the field of learning analytics.

The report analyses 734 case studies developed by frontline health workers in November 2020 as part of the COVID-19 Peer Hub, a peer learning programme led by theGeneva Learning Foundation (LinkedIn|YouTube|Twitter| Podcast). Learn more about this report… 734 health professionals from all levels of the health system took time out from their demanding daily duties to reflect on their practice, describing and then analyzing a situation in which they successfully helped an individual or a group accept or gain confidence that taking vaccines would protect them from disease. Furthermore, they did this during four weeks of remote collaboration at a very crucial historical moment, months before the first doses of COVID-19 vaccine were to arrive in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire. “Reading this report, I experienced a sense of discovery. The stories shared reminded me of my early work with colleagues working at the local levels, and gave me renewed appreciation ofthese health professionals who faced even greater challenges in the face of a deadly pandemic. I could feel how hard it is to remain that ‘most trusted adviser’ to communities, and how so much remains determined by the capacity of people on the frontlines to explain, advocate, and respond in ways that are almost entirely dictated by context, in this case a highly uncertain and evolving pandemic.” – From the preface by Heidi Larson,PhD, Professor of Anthropology, Risk and Decision Scienceand Founding Director of the Vaccine Confidence Projectat the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. Methodology: A mixed methods approach was adopted.The primary focus was the qualitative analysis of the case study narratives, underpinned by the quantitative analysis of demographic information about the scholars who produced the case studies. Amatrix was developed to guide the coding of data presented in the case study narratives.The approach used a balance of deductive coding (using pre-defined codes derived from the research questions) and inductive coding (adding new codes in response to themes emerging in the narratives. A total of 734 Scholars (case study authors) took part in the exercise: 81% (n=591) in West and Central Africa; 11% (n=80) in Eastern and Southern Africa; 6% (n=43) in South Asia. Scholars were engaged at different levels of the health system: 18% (n=131) at the national level; 29% (n=213) at a sub-national level; 29% (n=214) at the district level; 20% (n=144) in health facilities. The COVID-19 Scholar Peer Hub is a digital network hosted by The Geneva Learning Foundation (TGLF). During the COVID-19 outbreak, the network convened members working in the area of immunisation whose activities had been affected by the pandemic. TGLF supported network members to generate and share ideas and practices for supporting immunisation work across health system levels, organisational boundaries and country borders. TGLF identified COVID-19 vaccine introduction as a crucial focus of action for the network and implemented a peer review exercise based on network members’ experiences of overcoming barriers to vaccine acceptance. The study was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. &nbsp

Ce rapport analyse 734 études de cas élaborées par des agents de santé de première ligne en novembre 2020 dans le cadre du Réseau Réseau COVID-19, un programme d’apprentissage par les pairs dirigé par La Fondation Apprendre Genève (LinkedIn|YouTube|Twitter| Podcast). En savoir plus sur ce Rapport… 734 professionnels de santé de tous les niveaux du système de santé ont pris le temps de s’éloigner de leurs tâches quotidiennes exigeantes pour réfléchir à leur pratique, en décrivant puis en analysant une situation dans laquelle ils ont réussi à aider un individu ou un groupe à accepter ou à acquérir la confiance que la prise de vaccins les protégerait de la maladie. De plus, ils l’ont fait pendant quatre semaines de collaboration à distance à un moment historique très crucial, quelques mois avant l’arrivée des premières doses de vaccin COVID-19 au Ghana et en Côte d’Ivoire. «En lisant ce rapport, j’ai éprouvé un sentiment de découverte. Les histoires partagées m’ont rappelé mes premiers travaux avec des collègues travaillant au niveau local, et m’ont donné une appréciation renouvelée de ces professionnels de la santé qui ont dû faire face à des défis encore plus grands face à une pandémie mortelle. J’ai pu ressentir à quel point il est difficile de rester ce «conseiller le plus fiable» pour les communautés, et à quel point tout dépend de la capacité des personnes en première ligne à expliquer, défendre et répondre d’une manière qui est presque entièrement dictée par le contexte, dans ce cas une pandémie très incertaine et en évolution.»- Extrait de la préface de Heidi Larson, PhD, professeur d’anthropologie, de sciences du risque et de la décision et directrice fondatrice du Vaccine Confidence Project à la London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. Méthodologie: Une approche de méthodes mixtes a été adoptée. L’accent a été mis sur l’analyse qualitative des récits des études de cas, étayée par l’analyse quantitative des informations démographiques sur les universitaires qui ont produit les études de cas. Une matrice a été développée pour guider le codage des données présentées dans les récits des études de cas. L’approche a utilisé un équilibre entre le codage déductif (utilisant des codes prédéfinis dérivés des questions de recherche) et le codage inductif (ajoutant de nouveaux codes en réponse aux thèmes émergeant dans les récits. Au total, 734 Scholars (auteurs d’études de cas) ont pris part à l’exercice: 81% (n=591) en Afrique occidentale et centrale; 11% (n=80) en Afrique orientale et australe; 6% (n=43) en Asie du Sud. Les Scholars étaient engagés à différents niveaux du système de santé: 18% (n=131) au niveau national; 29% (n=213) à un niveau sous-national; 29% (n=214) au niveau du district; 20% (n=144) dans des établissements de santé. Le Réseau Scholar COVID-19 Réseau est un réseau digital hébergé par La Fondation Apprendre Genève (Fondation). Au début de la pandémiede COVID-19, le réseau a réuni des membres travaillant dans le domaine de la vaccination et dont les activités avaient été affectées par la pandémie. La Fondation Fondation a aidé les membres du réseau à générer et à partager des idées et des pratiques pour soutenir le travail de la vaccination à tous les niveaux du système de santé, des frontières organisationnelles et des frontières nationales. En novembre 2020, la Fondation a identifié l’introduction du vaccin COVID-19 comme un axe d’action crucial pour le réseau et a mis en place un exercice de revue par les pairs basé sur les expériences des membres du réseau à surmonter les obstacles à l’acceptation du vaccin. L’étude a été financée par la Fondation Bill et Melinda Gates.

Refereed/Peer-reviewed Technology is omnipresent in our rapidly changing digital world. Capitalising on these technologies is paramount for education systems to support a modern workforce. This study presents a review of 10 countries, highlighting how different public education systems have integrated digital technologies for teaching and learning. These education systems were selected based on their high performance and continuous improvement in international assessments. Four main themes emerged as key areas of focus from our analysis: improved and enhanced teaching and learning; digital maturation, including tackling the first and second digital divide; data-driven decision making and evidence-based education; and AI in education. Our findings will help benchmark current approaches and uses of digital teaching and learning, including perceived challenges and opportunities that can be used to inform the development and implementation of digital education policies.

Refereed/Peer-reviewed Roles that learners assume during online discussions are an important aspect of educational experience. The roles can be assigned to learners and/or can spontaneously emerge through student-student interaction. While existing research proposed several approaches for analytics of emerging roles, there is limited research in analytic methods that can i) automatically detect emerging roles that can be interpreted in terms of higher-order constructs of collaboration; ii) analyse the extent to which students complied to scripted roles and how emerging roles compare to scripted ones; and iii) track progression of roles in social knowledge progression over time. To address these gaps in the literature, this paper propose a network-analytic approach that combines techniques of cluster analysis and epistemic network analysis. The method was validated in an empirical study discovered emerging roles that were found meaningful in terms of social and cognitive dimensions of the well-known model of communities of inquiry. The study also revealed similarities and differences between emerging and script roles played by learners and identified different progression trajectories in social knowledge construction between emerging and scripted roles. The proposed analytic approach and the study results have implications that can inform teaching practice and development techniques for collaboration analytics.