Enhancing the User Interaction of Online Students: Analysis of an

Interaction Concept for a Learner Dashboard

Thorleif Harder

and Gilbert Drzyzga

Institute for Interactive Systems, Technische Hochschule Luebeck, Germany

Keywords:

Interaction Concept, Learner Dashboard, Navigation Mechanisms, Iterative Optimization, User Experience.

Abstract:

This paper describes the systematic development, evaluation, and iterative reﬁnement of an interaction concept

for a Learner Dashboard (LD) to enhance intuitive and user-centered engagement for online students. The core

of this concept is represented by precisely designed interaction elements such as icons, navigation mechanisms

and adaptive features, each iteratively reﬁned through a feedback loop. The concept emphasizes the crucial role

of intuitive icons and clear navigation, aligning with established design principles and user expectations. The

implementation of text buttons with arrow icons is particularly notable, enhancing affordances and signiﬁers

and signiﬁcantly improving the clarity of navigation paths and user guidance. Proactive support elements

like alerts and conﬁrmation prompts signiﬁcantly reduced user errors. The ﬁndings highlight the essential

role of iterative design and user feedback in tuning the interaction design to resonate with the cognitive and

emotional needs of online students, enhancing the user experience. The paper argues the evolved interaction

design represents a signiﬁcant step towards a user-centered and intuitive learning environment. Future work

should focus on real-world testing to evaluate the technical feasibility and user acceptance of the developed

concept in different learning scenarios.

1 INTRODUCTION

The advance of digitization has permanently changed

the way education is delivered. Platforms, such as

Moodle, have become central tools in this context, as

they represent the transition from traditional learning

methods to technology-enhanced approaches that en-

able a more individualized and self-directed learning

experience (Siemens, 2013). Moodle is a widely-used

open-source learning management system (LMS), of-

fering a variety of tools for course management and

delivery, collaborative learning, and assessment. A

particular feature of these platforms are learner dash-

boards (LDs), which provide a comprehensive view

of student learning by transforming data into visual

representations. An LD is a digital interface that

provides learners with an overview of their learning

activities, progress and performance within a LMS

and can provide support in their studies (Corrin and

de Barba, 2015). Visualizing learning through ef-

fective interaction concepts helps learners better un-

derstand progress and areas that need improvement

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9099-2351

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4983-9862

(Klerkx et al., 2014). However, extensive informa-

tion provision can also present difﬁculties. For ex-

ample, data overload can be more of a barrier than a

help to students, as it can create an additional cog-

nitive load that makes it difﬁcult to absorb and pro-

cess relevant information. In addition, students show

signiﬁcant differences in learning behaviors and tech-

nological abilities that must be considered. Variance

presents an additional challenge that it can affect the

effectiveness of LDs if they are not adjusted accord-

ingly (Parpala et al., 2022).

A research project of a university network is cur-

rently developing an LD that integrates an innovative

interaction concept. This concept aims to optimize

the presentation of information and improve usability

to address the identiﬁed challenges and improve the

overall user experience (UX).

1.1 The Role of Usability

The increasing complexity and information overload

of digital learning platforms consequently bring us-

ability to the forefront. An effective UX is determined

not only by the quality of the data presented, but also

by how that data can be presented and interpreted

Harder, T. and Drzyzga, G.

Enhancing the User Interaction of Online Students: Analysis of an Interaction Concept for a Learner Dashboard.

DOI: 10.5220/0012374600003660

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications (VISIGRAPP 2024) - Volume 1: GRAPP, HUCAPP

and IVAPP, pages 471-479

ISBN: 978-989-758-679-8; ISSN: 2184-4321

471

(Nielsen, 1994). An intuitive dashboard design that

minimizes cognitive load and facilitates information

intake can greatly enhance learning (Sweller, 1988;

Few, 2006). The combination of aesthetics, function-

ality, and adaptability is therefore crucial. The LD

and integrated interaction concept to be developed ad-

dresses exactly this issue and attempts to optimize us-

ability through an improved design.

1.2 Interaction as the Core of Digital

Learning Tools

Understanding the relationship between users and

digital platforms is not limited to the aesthetic de-

sign of user interfaces. Rather, the depth and qual-

ity of this relationship are crucially shaped by the un-

derlying interaction concepts (Few, 2006). In envi-

ronments like Moodle, the interactions signiﬁcantly

inﬂuence the learning experience (Siemens, 2013).

These determine how users retrieve, interpret, and re-

spond to information-especially in digital learning en-

vironments such as Moodle, where such interactions

inﬂuence the learning experience (Siemens, 2013).

Interaction and engagement in learning in online en-

vironments are complex and inﬂuenced by multiple

factors, such as learner self-efﬁcacy and emotional as-

pects, that can shape the learning process (Wang et al.,

2022).

Many of the dashboards currently available

(Kokoc and Altun, 2021; Jivet et al., 2017) often

rely on generic interaction models. While these mod-

els are useful, they may not adequately address the

unique challenges and requirements of online stu-

dents. One key aspect where generic models often fall

short is in supporting the self-regulation needs of on-

line students. Online students need tools to help them

set and track personal learning goals, manage their

time effectively, and self-assess their understanding

and progress. Self-regulation in an online learning

environment is crucial, as students are often expected

to take more responsibility for their learning journey.

The lack of personalized self-regulation tools in LDs

can lead to a mismatch between the student’s learn-

ing needs and the support provided by the platform,

potentially affecting motivation and overall learning

outcomes. The interaction concept introduced here

aims precisely to address these aspects. Here, we aim

for a design that addresses the real-world needs of on-

line students (Harder and Drzyzga, 2023) and enables

them to access information smoothly.

Against this background, the development of

interaction concepts should always be based on

well-founded research and regular feedback. User-

centered design (UCD) approaches that place online

students at the center of the development processes

help to ensure the effectiveness and relevance of the

interaction.

1.3 Objectives

Considering the listed challenges and the importance

of usability, this work focuses on the iterative devel-

opment and evaluation of a speciﬁc interaction con-

cept for an LD in Moodle. In the process, the three-

stage evaluation approach according to Drzyzga and

Harder (2023) is used to continuously optimize the

usability of the concept. With this background, this

work poses two central research questions that shed

light on this development and optimization process:

RQ1. How can iterative feedback cycles from user

testing directly inﬂuence and improve the design and

functionality of the interaction concept in the LD?

RQ2. In what ways does the reﬁnement of the interac-

tion concept though iterative development impact of

the usability and user experience (UUX) in the LD?

The primary goal of this work is to develop an in-

teraction concept that can be applied speciﬁcally to an

LD in Moodle as part of a project for the online degree

programs of a university network. The project focuses

on the development of a dashboard that supports the

learning process of online students through provided

information and recommendations. Through an iter-

ative approach and the integration of feedback from

the target group, a concept is to be developed that op-

timally shapes the learning environment for the users.

The LD aims to promote self-regulation of online stu-

dents and reduce dropout rates.

2 METHODOLOGICAL

DEVELOPMENT OF THE

INTERACTION CONCEPT

The developed interaction concept aims to optimize

the UUX by being based on the speciﬁc needs and re-

quirements of online students. A particular focus is on

avoiding information overload and reducing cognitive

load (Drzyzga et al., 2023) to promote efﬁcient and

effective interaction. The following sections elaborate

on the conceptual basis and the speciﬁc design and in-

teraction elements of the interaction concept that were

applied during the development process.

2.1 Conceptual Foundation

The conceptual foundation of the interaction concept

is based on the design study of Drzyzga and Harder

HUCAPP 2024 - 8th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Theory and Applications

472

Figure 1: This representation shows the complete evaluation process of the developed interaction process. This is based on

the design study according to Drzyzga and Harder (2023).

(2023), who engaged in an iterative UCD process to

develop an LD. In the process, three evaluation phases

were conducted to continuously optimize the usabil-

ity of the LD for online students (Drzyzga and Harder,

2023b). The evaluation phases included consideration

of design laws and factual and interaction problems,

evaluation based on speciﬁc interaction principles,

and analysis using an eye-tracking study (Drzyzga

et al., 2023). Figure 1 illustrates the evolution of

the interaction concept resulting from the iterative ap-

proach.

During the ongoing evaluation phases of the de-

sign study, there was a focus on the speciﬁc inter-

action of the users with the different interaction el-

ements of the prototype, but this has not been consid-

ered in detail so far.

In the next sections, interaction and the resulting

further development of the interaction concept will be

discussed in more depth to improve the UUX of the

LD.

2.1.1 Gestalt Laws and Factual and Interaction

Problems According to Streitz (1985)

In this phase, similar to the design study by Drzyzga

and Harder (2023), the entire LD was not considered.

The focus was only on the visual structure of the in-

teraction concept.

For this purpose, both Gestalt laws and Streitz’s

(1985) factual and interaction problems were exam-

ined in one study (Drzyzga and Harder, 2023a). The

Gestalt laws, originally derived from Gestalt psychol-

ogy, serve as essential principles to promote visual

clarity and coherence (Wertheimer, 1922). These

laws, including the law of proximity, similarity, and

good continuation, have been applied to create a clear

and logical visual structure that facilitates user navi-

gation and interaction of the LD.

By applying Streitzs model (1985), which differ-

entiates between factual and interactional problems,

online students (n = 24) were encouraged to iden-

tify potential challenges (Streitz, 1985). Participants

documented the identiﬁed LD and speciﬁc interaction

problems so that the interaction concept to be devel-

oped could be adjusted accordingly to Drzyzga and

Harder (2023).

2.1.2 Evaluation Based on Speciﬁc Interaction

Principles

The second phase of the design study of Drzyzga and

Harder (2023) focused on the practical evaluation of

the lot during a half-day workshop. This phase con-

centrated on applying and assessing the UUX of the

low-ﬁdelity LD prototype, evaluated by 24 students.

The evaluation was based on the interaction principles

deﬁned in the EN ISO 9241-110:2020 standard, and

Drzyzga and Harder (2023b) considered all seven in-

teraction principles in their study (DIN, 2020). How-

ever, four principles were particularly pivotal for the

interaction concept’s further development and opti-

mization: Self-descriptiveness, Conformity to User

Expectations, Learnability, and Robustness to User

Error. These principles formed the methodological

basis for evaluating various interaction options in the

prototype. The selection was based on the speciﬁc

context and goals of the LD, with the aim of prior-

itizing aspects that would provide the most signiﬁ-

cant improvements in UX and interaction. The re-

maining three principles, while valuable, were con-

sidered to have less immediate impact on improving

the interaction concept. This strategic selection al-

lowed for a more targeted and effective improvement

of the LD, focusing on areas that would provide the

most tangible beneﬁts to users in the learning envi-

ronment. Self-descriptiveness ensures intuitive under-

standing of the dashboard’s functions, while Confor-

mity to User Expectations ensures the dashboard op-

erates consistently with user expectations. Learnabil-

ity allows users to learn the system quickly and use it

efﬁciently, while robustness to user error increases the

system’s resilience to errors and misunderstandings.

The focus was on speciﬁc interaction capabilities that

are essential to the design of interaction concepts.

Drzyzga and Harder’s (2023b) research high-

lighted these interaction principles’ importance in the

Enhancing the User Interaction of Online Students: Analysis of an Interaction Concept for a Learner Dashboard

473

design process. Applying these principles enabled a

solid evaluation and optimization of the interaction

concept, allowing the prototype’s UUX to be system-

atically evaluated and reﬁned for intuitive UX.

2.1.3 Evaluation Through Eye-Tracking Study

The ﬁnal eye-tracking evaluation (n = 10), conducted

as another study (Drzyzga et al., 2023) and supported

by the Thinking Aloud technique, explored user in-

teraction with the LD from a new perspective. The

users eye movements captured by eye-tracking and

the verbal feedback from the Thinking Aloud sessions

provided insights into cognitive load and user guid-

ance that contributed to the further development of

the interaction concept. This study highlighted two

key challenges: increased cognitive load due to com-

plex navigation and unclear interaction elements, and

overwhelming information density in certain LD ar-

eas. These ﬁndings led to targeted improvements in

navigation simplicity, clarity of interaction elements,

and optimized information presentation. In addition

to the objectives of the design study (Drzyzga and

Harder, 2023a) and the eye-tracking study (Drzyzga

et al., 2023), this research aimed to identify speciﬁc

challenges and cognitive efforts directly related to the

interaction concept, such as analyzing eye movements

in the context of navigation or understanding user ex-

pectations during the activation of an interaction ele-

ment.

2.2 Design Elements and Interaction

Flows

The systematic development of the interaction design

within the LD focused on enhancing UUX and learn-

ing efﬁciency. During follow-up/iterative sessions,

the interaction concept was considered separately to

provide a speciﬁc focus within the LD, ensuring that

each element aligns closely with user needs. The se-

lection and design of interaction elements, as shown

in Table 1, were driven by two main objectives: to

enhance intuitiveness for seamless navigation and to

foster user engagement through customization fea-

tures. These elements are pivotal to the UUX of the

LD, acting as primary interfaces for user interaction.

The expected outcomes of this design approach

include improved usability, achieved through a more

intuitive interface, and enhanced learning outcomes,

facilitated by allowing students to interact with the

LD in a better way.

The table 1 below shows an overview of the main

interaction elements implemented in the LD, grouped

by their functional category. This categorization helps

to better understand and organize the different roles

these elements play in the context of the interaction

concept.

Table 1: Representation of the interaction elements and as-

sociated functions.

Fig. Interaction ele-

ments

Functions

Navigation elements

Maximize / mini-

mize icons

Navigation be-

tween Summary-

and detailed view

Zoom in / zoom

out icons

Navigation be-

tween Summary-

and detailed view

Arrow icons Navigation be-

tween Summary-

and detailed view

Text buttons Used for trigger-

ing speciﬁc actions

and navigation

Information and help elements

Information icon Provides help

or additional in-

formation on a

speciﬁc topic

Question mark

icon

Provides help

or additional in-

formation on a

speciﬁc topic

Editing elements

Trash can icon Used to delete spe-

ciﬁc entries or in-

formation

Pencil Icon Allows editing of

entries or informa-

tion

In accordance with established concepts, the de-

sign of the interaction elements was systematically

developed to ensure an intuitive interaction concept

(Ifenthaler et al., 2018). A particular focus was placed

on the iterative sessions to continuously optimize the

interaction concept and better meet the needs of on-

line students.

HUCAPP 2024 - 8th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Theory and Applications

474

3 RESULTS OF THE

INTERACTION CONCEPT

The following sections present the central ﬁndings

from the different evaluation phases of the developed

interaction concept. The ﬁndings are divided into two

main sections: The optimization of speciﬁc interac-

tion elements and a deeper exploration of fundamen-

tal interaction principles. The analyses and adjust-

ments based on both user feedback and the applica-

tion of accepted design principles.

These optimizations of the interaction elements

directly reﬂect RQ1 by demonstrating how iterative

feedback cycles from user testing directly inﬂuence

and improve the design and functionality of the inter-

action concept in the LD.

3.1 Evaluation and Optimization of the

Interaction Elements

Optimization of the interaction elements played a crit-

ical role in increasing the efﬁciency and effectiveness

of the LD. Through precise analysis and adjustments,

the interaction elements were reﬁned to better align

with user expectations and facilitate smoother naviga-

tion, thereby signiﬁcantly contributing to an improved

user-centric environment within the LD.

3.1.1 Icon Adaptation and Visual Clarity

During the iteration process, it was evident that some

icons in the original design caused confusion. In par-

ticular, the visual similarity between the cross and

trash can icons and between the question mark icon

and information icon created ambiguity among users.

Users reported difﬁculty distinguishing content differ-

ences between these icons, presenting potential con-

fusion (Drzyzga and Harder, 2023a). To address this,

a careful selection process for the icons was imple-

mented. The decision-making was based on user

feedback and standard iconography practices. We

sourced icons from Google Material, known for its

intuitive and universally recognizable designs. This

library was chosen for its adherence to industry stan-

dards in icon design, ensuring that the icons are easily

recognizable and understood by a wide user base. In

the redesign, we removed the information icon and

trash can to enhance their uniqueness and recogniz-

ability. The chosen icons were designed to follow

the Gestalt law of separability, enhancing their dis-

tinctiveness. This design principle was particularly

important in ensuring that each icon clearly conveyed

its intended function without ambiguity.

Regarding the pencil icon, participants were

mostly positive. Participants expressed that this could

be due to the Gestalt law of closedness, as the icon

has a clear and closed outline that is easy to recognize

and understand. Despite the positive feedback, there

is still room for further investigation to optimize the

UUX.

The optimization of icon arrangement and visual

elements on the LD also adhered to the design prin-

ciples of proximity and common region, enhancing

intuitive UUX. To this effect, the positioning of icons

was revised in both horizontal and vertical orienta-

tion to create visual balance and minimize potential

confusion. The consistent layout promotes clear nav-

igation of the LD, which helps to improve the UUX.

Participants noted that the revised icon arrangement

and clearly delineated dashboard areas facilitated in-

teraction. Figure 2 visualizes this adaptation.

Figure 2: Repositioning of the interaction elements.

The left ﬁgure shows the LD in the second iter-

ation step, in that the icons are still arranged in this

way. The frames are again meant to represent the lack

of coherence between the elements. The right ﬁgure

shows the result after the students’ feedback has been

integrated into the interaction concept.

3.1.2 Adaptations for Intuitive Navigation

Another adaptation related to the navigation concept.

In the ﬁrst iteration step, a maximize and minimize

icon were used. These icons were chosen because

they symbolically allow to maximize/minimize the

amount of information. Maximizing allows you to

capture more information brieﬂy, while minimizing

allows for a clearer, less cluttered view. However,

respondents incorrectly associated these icons with a

move function, which interfered with the desired nav-

igation function. Based on student feedback, these

icons were replaced with a zoom in / zoom out icon

to improve the clarity of the function for navigating

between the summary and detailed views and to opti-

mize the UUX (Fig. 3).

In the further process of the study, it turned out

that the users had difﬁculties ﬁnding their way in the

ﬂat hierarchy with the help of the zoom in / zoom

out between the views. The previously used zoom

icons, which stood for the detailed view, were recog-

nized as not sufﬁciently intuitive. Consequently, we

Enhancing the User Interaction of Online Students: Analysis of an Interaction Concept for a Learner Dashboard

475

Figure 3: Detailed presentation of changes from the ﬁrst

evaluation phase to the second evaluation phase.

replaced these icons with a larger button to better sig-

nify view transitions. In the eye-tracking study con-

ducted (Drzyzga et al., 2023), it became clear that, on

the one hand, the combination between text and icon

(arrow pointing to the right, thereby indicating the

navigation direction) and, on the other hand, the en-

larged button reinforced the interaction with the but-

ton and was more intuitive. Figure 4 illustrates the

navigation concept’s evolution from the second to the

third iteration step.

These adaptations for intuitive navigation, like

the zoom in/out icons and the enlarged button, also

demonstrate RQ1. They highlight the incorporation

and implementation of user feedback in iterative cy-

cles to enhance the LD’s usability and efﬁciency.

Figure 4: Detailed presentation of changes from the second

evaluation phase to the third evaluation phase.

As a result, it showed that, in contrast to the pre-

vious evaluations, all participants reached the naviga-

tion to the detailed view.

Navigation was also supported by the introduction

of text elements that always indicated to users which

area or level of the LD they were currently in (Figure

5). This improvement made it possible to reduce the

feeling of disorientation and further minimize cogni-

tive load.

Figure 5: Adaptation of a text element for improved orien-

tation in LD.

3.2 Focused Evaluation Based on

Interaction Principles

In the previous section, the focus was on optimizing

speciﬁc interaction elements. In this section, we aim

to take a more in-depth look at interaction principles.

By analyzing the principles of Self-descriptiveness,

Conformity with User Expectations, Learnability, and

Robustness to User Error, an understanding of how

the interaction concept affects the UUX is gained.

These principles directly address RQ2, exploring

how the reﬁnement of the interaction concept through

iterative development impacts UUX in LDs.

3.2.1 Self-Descriptiveness and Conformity with

User Expectations

A consideration of the principles of Self-

descriptiveness and Conformity with User Ex-

pectations led to ﬁndings regarding user expectations

and further results of intuitive navigation. It was

determined that the introduction of a ”back button”

was identiﬁed as a necessary addition to provide

users with a familiar navigation option. Participants

expressed that they are used to ﬁnding a back button

in the upper left margin from other applications,

which was missing in our concept (Fig. 1).

Furthermore, the importance of feedback mecha-

nisms became clear from the user feedback. Here, it

was highlighted that visual feedback after interaction

can provide conﬁrmation to users whether their action

was successful or whether an error occurred.

Likewise, the need for an accessible and easy-to-

understand help section, signaled by a question mark

icon, became clear. Users emphasized that such a fea-

ture is of great importance to them, especially when

ambiguities or difﬁculties arise. In addition, partici-

pants stressed the importance of consistent placement

of elements, especially icons, to avoid confusion.

3.2.2 Learnability and Robustness Against User

Error

The primary aim of these principles was to make the

interaction concept easy to learn and use. During

the evaluation, it was found that users were unsure

how to edit and add dashboard elements. To address

this issue, clear instructions and guidance were added

to guide the user through the process, Drzyzga and

Harder (2023b) have already fully executed this ap-

proach in their work. Additionally, mouse hover sup-

port was introduced, providing extra information or

instructions when hovering over an element.

A central consideration was the robustness of the

interaction concept against common user errors. The

evaluation showed that accidental deletion of cards

was a recurring problem. Participants appeared over-

whelmed after an accidental deletion, with reactions

such as ”Did I just press somewhere?” or ”How did

that happen?”. To counteract this problem, additional

HUCAPP 2024 - 8th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Theory and Applications

476

conﬁrmation prompts were introduced before deleting

a card.

The eye-tracking study showed, regarding the in-

teraction concept, that one participant had difﬁculty

deactivating the edit mode again.

4 CONCLUSION

After thorough evaluation and iterative optimization,

this chapter presents the last version of the interac-

tion concept for the LD in the evaluation process.

The ﬁndings collected in the previous chapters and

the feedback from the users provided the basis for the

elaboration of this last concept. The goal was to cre-

ate a user-centered and intuitive interaction concept

that signiﬁcantly improves the UUX (Fig. 6).

Figure 6: Presentation of the last interaction concept in the

evaluation process

This version features evaluated icons that were re-

ﬁned during an extensive iterative process. In addi-

tion, navigation that was identiﬁed as intuitive in the

tests was integrated into the LD, but its technical ef-

fectiveness has yet to be validated. Based on this, it

must be considered whether the developed interaction

concept also proves itself in technical reality.

In the following, the core components of the latest

interaction concept of the evaluation process as well

as the underlying design principles are presented in

detail.

4.1 Navigation and User Guidance

In the latest iteration of the interaction concept, the

navigation structure takes a central role. Although the

hierarchy is inherently ﬂat, a clear and deﬁned naviga-

tion path was established through iterative evaluation

cycles. This ensures that users can navigate between

the summary and detailed views seamlessly despite

the clarity of the user interface. Sahin and Ifenthaler

(2021) note this approach helps prevent disorientation

in online students.

The speciﬁc positioning of navigation icons fol-

lows established design conventions that have been

established through empirical research in the ﬁeld of

user interaction. In alignment with the ﬁndings of

Molich et al. (2004), the speciﬁc positioning of nav-

igation icons supports users to better understand the

structure of the application and to navigate efﬁciently

through the user interface. The integration of text

buttons with arrow icons, found helpful in feedback

rounds, clariﬁes navigation paths and enhances user

guidance (Molich et al., 2004). Here, the arrow icons

act as signiﬁers that signal the direction of navigation

and thus reinforce the affordance of the text buttons

(Pucillo and Cascini, 2014; Norman, 1999). The vi-

sual and semantic support of the arrow icons makes it

clear to users in which direction the navigation paths

lead. This allows for intuitive user guidance. It should

be noted that this consideration took place exclusively

in a simulated environment. A test of the interaction

concept under real conditions is still pending.

The interaction concept also features a strategi-

cally placed ”back button” in the upper-left corner

(Fig. 6), aligning with common application interface

standards (Sahin and Ifenthaler, 2021). In addition,

based on the ﬁndings from the observation of the fac-

tual and interaction problems, a text element was in-

troduced that always indicates to the user in which

area or on which level of the dashboard the user is

currently located (Fig. 5). This adjustment assists the

user in reducing feelings of disorientation and further

minimizing cognitive load (Sweller, 1988).

Ongoing reﬁnement of these navigation features

aims to meet user needs and align with latest research

in user guidance and interaction (Susnjak et al., 2022).

4.2 Interaction Elements

A precise and thoughtful design of elements was key

in the latest iteration of the interaction concept. These

elements serve as crucial intermediaries between on-

line students and the system’s functions. The iterative

design process of the icons was fundamental to the

improvement of the UUX, supported by the contin-

uous collection and analysis of user feedback (Sahin

and Ifenthaler, 2021). Each iteration involved test-

ing the icons against criteria such as clarity, recog-

nisability and user expectations. User feedback, ob-

tained through usability testing, was instrumental in

this evaluation. The success of each iteration was

measured by improvements in user interaction met-

rics, including task completion time, icon usage accu-

racy, and user satisfaction. These measures were re-

lated to the research questions. For RQ1, the impact

of iterative feedback cycles on design and function-

Enhancing the User Interaction of Online Students: Analysis of an Interaction Concept for a Learner Dashboard

477

ality improvements was evident through the progres-

sive reﬁnement of icon clarity and utility. For RQ2,

improved learner motivation and effectiveness in the

Moodle LD was observed through increased usability

and positive user feedback in subsequent iterations.

The question mark icon, which was integrated into

the LD from the beginning, deserves special attention.

It was not just a design decision but was intended to

anticipate and address the potential uncertainty and

questions of online students. In doing so, it represents

a proactive tool that not only helps users with existing

questions, but also helps prevent future uncertainties

from arising in the ﬁrst place.

In addition, the pencil icon was integrated into

the interaction concept as an interaction element. In

this way, online students are enabled to customize

content in the LD according to their needs (Nguyen

et al., 2021). The integration of the pencil icon sig-

nals that users are actively involved in designing and

customizing their learning environment. Overall, the

design and interaction elements embody a scientiﬁc

and methodological approach, aligning with online

students’ cognitive and emotional needs and narrow-

ing the gap between user and technology.

4.3 Adaptive Interaction Mechanisms

The developed interaction mechanisms within the in-

teraction concept are characterized by their adaptabil-

ity into the LD. The results show that this adaptabil-

ity not only increases user satisfaction, but also in-

creases the efﬁciency and effectiveness of the interac-

tions. Han et al. (2021) underscore the importance

of adaptability in LDs, demonstrating how adaptive

feedback mechanisms promote interaction efﬁciency

and user satisfaction in university settings.

A key ﬁnding is the intuitive editing and cus-

tomization of the LD, corroborating Drzyzga and

Harder’s (2023) research on the signiﬁcance of such

features. However, during the interaction approach, it

becomes clear that customization of the learning en-

vironment corrects with the results of a reduction in

cognitive load and increased user engagement. The

immediate feedback from the system to the user is an-

other aspect of the interaction concept. Continuous

feedback, whether through visual signals, has been

shown to be crucial in minimizing user uncertainty

and providing a sense of reassurance (Chen et al.,

2021).

Proactive system support is another critical aspect.

The integration of alerts and conﬁrmation prompts

signiﬁcantly reduced the number of user errors in var-

ious user tests, demonstrating a tangible beneﬁt of

predictive support mechanisms (Nielsen and Molich,

1990). These proactive strategies, designed to antic-

ipate and prevent user errors, align with Han et al.’s

(2021) ﬁndings on their importance in LDs. By re-

ducing user errors, these mechanisms enhance UUX

and effective navigation in practical learning contexts.

5 OUTLOOK

The presented interaction concept for the LD repre-

sents an important step towards a user-centered and

intuitive learning environment. By applying an itera-

tive methodology based on UCD, this concept clearly

stands out from existing approaches. It is speciﬁcally

tailored to the needs of online students and offers a

customized solution to improve the UUX.

This research offers multidimensional insights: it

contributes to LD research by demonstrating how a

user-centered approach can improve the UUX. In con-

trast to many existing LDs, which are often based on

standardized interaction models, our concept focuses

speciﬁcally on the speciﬁc requirements of online stu-

dents.

Future pilot projects in various learning environ-

ments will evaluate both the technical practicability

and user acceptance of the developed concept. These

projects will serve to identify the strengths and weak-

nesses of the current design and further optimize us-

ability. An important focus of future research will be

to investigate how the iterative design process inﬂu-

ences user engagement and effectiveness in the con-

text of LDs.

In summary, this work provides a solid basis for

the further development and empirical testing of the

interaction concept in real-life scenarios. The ongo-

ing research project opens up promising opportuni-

ties for a targeted reﬁnement of the concept in order

to further improve the learning experience of online

students.

Furthermore, it is crucial to test the interaction

concept in terms of its applicability and effectiveness

in different learning contexts. This includes analyz-

ing the usability, intuitive navigation and adaptability

of the concept to different user proﬁles. Particular at-

tention should be paid to how the concept responds

to the individual interaction patterns and preferences

of online students and how it helps to simplify and

personalize interaction with the learning material.

REFERENCES

Chen, C.-M., Wang, J.-Y., and Hsu, L.-C. (2021). An

interactive test dashboard with diagnosis and feed-

HUCAPP 2024 - 8th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction Theory and Applications

478

back mechanisms to facilitate learning performance.

Computers and Education: Artiﬁcial Intelligence,

2:100015.

Corrin, L. and de Barba, P. (2015). How do students inter-

pret feedback delivered via dashboards? In Proceed-

ings of the Fifth International Conference on Learn-

ing Analytics And Knowledge, pages 430–431, Pough-

keepsie New York. ACM.

DIN (2020). Ergonomie der mensch-system-interaktion –

teil 110: Interaktionsprinzipien. Din en iso 9241-

110:2020-10, Beuth Verlag GmbH. Zugriff am 2023-

10-20.

Drzyzga, G. and Harder, T. (2023a). Student-centered

development of an online learning support feedback

software tool: A design study approach. In Proceed-

ings of the 7th International Conference on Computer-

Human Interaction Research and Applications, Rome,

Italy. SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publi-

cations. in Print.

Drzyzga, G. and Harder, T. (2023b). User-Centered Design

and Iterative Reﬁnement: Promoting Student Learn-

ing with an Interactive Dashboard:. In Proceedings

of the 19th International Conference on Web Infor-

mation Systems and Technologies, pages 340–346,

Rome, Italy. SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology

Publications.

Drzyzga, G., Harder, T., and Janneck, M. (2023). Cognitive

Effort in Interaction with Software Systems for Self-

regulation - An Eye-Tracking Study. In Harris, D.

and Li, W.-C., editors, Engineering Psychology and

Cognitive Ergonomics, volume 14017, pages 37–52.

Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham.

Few, S. (2006). Information dashboard design: the effec-

tive visual communication of data. O’Reilly, Beijing ;

Cambride [MA], 1st ed edition.

Harder, T. and Drzyzga, G. (2023). Perzeption und

prferenzen von online-studierenden zu lernenden-

dashboards: Designelemente, akzeptanz und ml-

basierte lernfortschrittsprognosen. In Tagungs-

band der GMW2023: Integration und Ko-Kreation:

Miteinander von Mensch und Maschine in Forschung

und Bildung, Jena, Deutschland. Waxmann. In Print.

Ifenthaler, D., Gibson, D., and Dobozy, E. (2018). Inform-

ing learning design through analytics: Applying net-

work graph analysis. Australasian Journal of Educa-

tional Technology, 34(2).

Jivet, I., Scheffel, M., Drachsler, H., and Specht, M. (2017).

Awareness Is Not Enough: Pitfalls of Learning An-

alytics Dashboards in the Educational Practice. In

Lavou, ., Drachsler, H., Verbert, K., Broisin, J., and

Prez-Sanagustn, M., editors, Data Driven Approaches

in Digital Education, volume 10474, pages 82–96.

Springer International Publishing, Cham.

Klerkx, J., Verbert, K., and Duval, E. (2014). Enhancing

Learning with Visualization Techniques. In Spector,

J. M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., and Bishop, M. J., ed-

itors, Handbook of Research on Educational Commu-

nications and Technology, pages 791–807. Springer

New York, New York, NY.

Kokoc, M. and Altun, A. (2021). Effects of learner inter-

action with learning dashboards on academic perfor-

mance in an e-learning environment. Behaviour & In-

formation Technology, 40(2):161–175.

Molich, R., Ede, M. R., Kaasgaard, K., and Karyukin, B.

(2004). Comparative usability evaluation. Behaviour

& Information Technology, 23(1):65–74.

Nguyen, A., Tuunanen, T., Gardner, L., and Sheridan, D.

(2021). Design principles for learning analytics infor-

mation systems in higher education. European Jour-

nal of Information Systems, 30(5):541–568.

Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability engineering. Morgan Kauf-

mann Publishers, San Francisco, Calif., [updated ed.]

edition. OCLC: 844940343.

Nielsen, J. and Molich, R. (1990). Heuristic evaluation of

user interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Confer-

ence on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI

’90, page 249256, New York, NY, USA. Association

for Computing Machinery.

Norman, D. A. (1999). Affordance, conventions, and de-

sign. Interactions, 6(3):38–43.

Parpala, A., Mattsson, M., Herrmann, K. J., Bager-Elsborg,

A., and Hailikari, T. (2022). Detecting the Variability

in Student Learning in Different DisciplinesA Person-

Oriented Approach. Scandinavian Journal of Educa-

tional Research, 66(6):1020–1037.

Pucillo, F. and Cascini, G. (2014). A framework for user

experience, needs and affordances. Design Studies,

35(2):160–179.

Sahin, M. and Ifenthaler, D., editors (2021). Visualizations

and Dashboards for Learning Analytics. Advances in

Analytics for Learning and Teaching. Springer Inter-

national Publishing, Cham.

Siemens, G. (2013). Learning Analytics: The Emer-

gence of a Discipline. American Behavioral Scientist,

57(10):1380–1400.

Streitz, N. (1985). Die Rolle von mentalen und

konzeptuellen Modellen in der Mensch-Computer-

Interaktion: Konsequenzen fr die Software-

Ergonomie? In Software-Erqonomie ’85: Mensch-

Computer-lnteraktion, pages 280–292. B.G.Teubner,

Stuttgart.

Susnjak, T., Ramaswami, G. S., and Mathrani, A. (2022).

Learning analytics dashboard: a tool for providing

actionable insights to learners. International Jour-

nal of Educational Technology in Higher Education,

19(1):12.

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive Load During Problem

Solving: Effects on Learning. Cognitive Science,

12(2):257–285.

Wang, Y., Cao, Y., Gong, S., Wang, Z., Li, N., and Ai, L.

(2022). Interaction and learning engagement in on-

line learning: The mediating roles of online learning

self-efﬁcacy and academic emotions. Learning and

Individual Differences, 94:102128.

Wertheimer, M. (1922). Untersuchungen zur Lehre von der

Gestalt: I. Prinzipielle Bemerkungen. Psychologische

Forschung, 1(1):47–58.

Enhancing the User Interaction of Online Students: Analysis of an Interaction Concept for a Learner Dashboard

479