This analysis draws from a focus group participated by first year students from the BSc Economics and Data Science programme who took the Introduction to Microeconomics course at New Uzbekistan University in the Fall semester. Participants included students from both the Treatment group (who received weekly email notifications and conditional access to materials contingent on quiz completion) and the Control group (who had unrestricted access and no targeted email reminders).
Participants include Malika and Javohir from the Control group and Juldiz and Dinora from the Treatment group. Interviews were conducted on MS Teams in 30-minute sessions (due to the lecturer’s account-specific restrictions). Javohir joined late to the last session.
The discussions covered overall course experience, understanding of engagement monitoring, responses to interventions, most helpful elements, challenges, and recommendations.
Overall Course Experience
Students across both groups described the course positively.
Malika (Control) noted that the explanations were clearer and more accessible than prior economics teaching she had received. She understood the content even when not looking at the lecturer. She set personal Sunday deadlines for quizzes and found the course manageable once she became punctual.
Dinora (Treatment) emphasised that it was her first economics course and first-time studying economics in English. She noted that the lecturer’s simple explanations, lecture notes, and guidance made the material catchable.
Juldiz (Treatment) similarly described the course as interesting and the explanations as clear, stating that the course overall was “amazing”.
Challenging aspects centred on later topics (e.g., taxes) that required more study time and on concepts that needed repeated reading, YouTube videos, or peer discussion.
Malika reported that her marks dipped on one assignment, prompting her to study harder. Dinora and Juldiz both mentioned talking with each other to clarify difficult points.
Understanding of Engagement Monitoring and Learning Analytics
Treatment-group students (Juldiz and Dinora) became aware of monitoring through weekly emails and in-class reminders. Juldiz said the emails informed her that her engagement with course materials and class activities were being monitored and that this pushed her to complete quizzes and read materials promptly. She also recalled in-class announcements encouraging study and quiz completion. Dinora understood the monitoring as research aimed at understanding how engagement relates to academic performance; she tried to obtain high quiz scores as a result. Both stated that they first became clearly aware of formal learning-analytics use either mid-semester or at the end-of-course survey.
Malika (Control) stated she had no idea of group division or learning-analytics monitoring until the focus group interview. She was aware only of general in-class checks by the lecturer and tutorial teacher, and of attendance warnings. Javohir (Control) similarly reported no email notifications and relied on in-class mentions of quizzes.
All participants expressed comfort with data collection (quiz completion, marks, attendance, assignments). Juldiz and Dinora viewed it as helpful for improving future teaching methods and for other students. Malika and Javohir also said they were fine with it. No participant voiced concerns or worries about privacy.
Impact of Interventions (Emails, Conditional Access, and Monitoring)
Treatment group students reported that weekly emails and the conditional-access rule (must complete the quiz to unlock the following week’s materials) increased punctuality and regular study. Juldiz stated the emails created positive pressure (“I should study”) and that she would still complete quizzes without them but not on time. Dinora said notifications helped her stay disciplined when she forgot quizzes, and that completing quizzes unlocked new materials, which motivated her. Both described the interventions as helpful rather than negative.
Control group students preferred the absence of requirements to complete formative tasks. Malika said she felt better without deadlines; requirements and deadlines might lead her to rush or use external tools. She would accept non-obligatory notifications. Javohir preferred email reminders (rather than relying solely on the Hero platform) because many students do not check Hero regularly, but he also completed quizzes on his own schedule after in-class announcements.
In-class announcements were noted by Treatment group students as reinforcing the email messages. No participant described the monitoring or interventions as judgemental or demotivating.
Most Helpful Elements of the Learning-Analytics Approach
Participants consistently ranked quizzes highly. Juldiz and Dinora said quizzes helped them identify weak areas, stay engaged on a weekly basis, and develop regular study habits. Malika ranked lecture slides first (especially for graphs), then lecture notes, with quizzes and “Question of the Week” lower. Dinora ranked lecture slides/notes highest, followed by notifications and quizzes. Javohir emphasised tutorials and quizzes for preparation and memorisation; he also valued question of the week for weekly summary.
“Question of the Week” was described by Dinora and Juldiz as pushing deeper economic thinking and requiring thorough reading of the book. Lecture notes and slides were repeatedly called essential for exam preparation and for clarifying concepts. Notifications (Treatment group only) were credited with maintaining punctuality.
Challenges and Problems
The most frequently cited difficulty was the lack of detailed quiz feedback on the Hero platform. Students could see overall scores (e.g., 8/10 or 90%) but could not identify which specific questions were incorrect. Malika, Juldiz, Dinora, and Javohir all raised this point. Malika noted that it increased the chance of repeating the same mistake on exams. Javohir and Malika also reported platform problems: inability to locate slides for later weeks, internet connectivity issues preventing quiz access, and occasional issues with presentation slides.
Recommendations from Students
Students framed the following suggestions as ways to retain the helpful structure while reducing friction caused by the platform and the absence of detailed feedback on quizzes.
Provide item-level feedback after quizzes so students can see exact mistakes.
Send lecture slides by email in addition to (or instead of) posting only on Hero, because many students find Hero difficult to navigate.
Continue or expand non-obligatory email notifications and reminders (especially useful for first-year transition students) but start with more frequent reminders and then reduce them.
Consider peer-group work or in-class competitions to increase engagement.
Maintain office-hour support for individual review of mistakes (already used by some students who emailed the lecturer).
Summary of How Learning Analytics Was Experienced
Students in the Treatment group experienced the combination of email notifications and conditional quiz access as motivating and helpful; they completed quizzes more regularly and viewed the interventions as supportive. Control group students preferred autonomy and did not feel disadvantaged by the absence of conditions, although they indicated that optional email reminders would still be welcome. Students were comfortable with their engagement data being collected for analysis. The course materials including quizzes, notes, slides, question of the week were effective for students’ learning. The principal limitations noted were mainly technical due to Hero platform not being user-friendly and missing quiz feedback. The focus group participants therefore characterised the learning analytics approach as largely supportive of engagement and punctuality. They also identified concrete platform and feedback improvements that would strengthen its usefulness in future courses.