Advertisement

Two-Stage Predictive Modeling for Identifying At-Risk Students

  • Brett E. Shelton
  • Juan Yang
  • Jui-Long Hung
  • Xu Du
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11003)

Abstract

This study proposes an analytic approach which combines two predictive models (the predictive model of successful students and the predictive model of at-risk students) to enhance prediction performance for use under the constraints of limited data collection. A case study was conducted to examine the effects of the model combination approach. Eight variables were collected from a data warehouse and the Learning Management System. The best model was selected based on the lowest misclassification rate in the validation dataset. The confusion matrix compares the model’s performance with the following parameters: accuracy, misclassification, and sensitivity. The results show the new combination approach can capture more at-risk students than the singular predictive model, and is only suitable for the ensemble predictive algorithms.

Keywords

Learning analytics Academic at-risk factors Academic success factors Ensemble model 

References

  1. 1.
    Babson Survey Research Group: Digital learning compass: distance education enrollment report (2017). http://digitallearningcompass.org/. Accessed 13 May 2017
  2. 2.
    Floyd, C., Schultz, T., Fulton, S.: Proceedings of the 16th Colloquium for Information Systems Security Education. Colloquium for Information Systems Security Education, Lake Buena Vista, Florida (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goldstein, P. J.: Academic analytics: the use of management information and technology in higher education. Educause (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bichsel, J.: Analytics in higher education: benefits, barriers, progress, and recommendations. Educause (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Norris, D., Baer, L.L.: Building organizational capacity for analytics. Educause (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yanosky, R.: Institutional data management in higher education. Educause (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giesbers, B., Rienties, B., Tempelaar, D., Gijselaers, W.: Investigating the relations between motivation, tool use, participation, and performance in an e-learning course using web-videoconferencing. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29(1), 285–292 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nora, Amaury, & Gloria, C.: Hispanic student participation and success in developmental education. Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Freitas, S., Gibson, D., Du Plessis, C., Halloran, P., Williams, E., Ambrose, M., Dunwell, I., Arnab, S.: Foundations of dynamic learning analytics: using university student data to increase retention. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 46(6), 1175–1188 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ivankova, N.V., Stick, S.L.: Students’ persistence in a distributed doctoral program in educational leadership in higher education: a mixed methods study. Res. High. Educ. 48(1), 93 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jo, I.-H., Yu, T., Lee, H., Kim, Y.: Relations between student online learning behavior and academic achievement in higher education: a learning analytics approach. In: Chen, G., Kumar, V., Kinshuk, Huang, R., Kong, S.C. (eds.) Emerging Issues in Smart Learning. LNET, pp. 275–287. Springer, Heidelberg (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44188-6_38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aragon, S.R., Johnson, E.S.: Factors influencing completion and noncompletion of community college online courses. Am. J. Distance Educ. 22(3), 146–158 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bowen, W.G., Chingos, M.M., McPherson, M.S.: Crossing the Finish Line: Completing College at America’s Public Universities. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Campbell, J.P., deBlois, P., Oblinger, D.G.: Academic analytics: a new tool for a new era. Educause 42(4), 40–57 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Campbell, J.P., Oblinger, D.G.: Academic analytics. Educause 42, 1–24 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Choy, S.: Students whose parents did not go to college: postsecondary access, persistence, and attainment. NCES Publication no. 2001–126 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Colorado, J.T., Eberle, J.: Student demographics and success in online learning environments. Emporia State Res. Stud. 46(1), 4–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cortes, C.M.: Profile in action: linking admission and retention. New Dir. High. Educ. 2013(161), 59–69 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Demetriou, C., Schmitz-Sciborski, A.: Integration, motivation, strengths, and optimism: Retention theories past, present, and future. In: Hayes, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the 7th National Symposium on Student Retention, Charleston, pp. 300–312. The University of Oklahoma, Norman (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Falcon, L.: Breaking down barriers: first-generation college students and college success. Innovation 10(6). https://www.league.org/innovation-showcase/breaking-down-barriers-first-generation-college-students-and-college-success. Accessed 16 Apr 2017
  21. 21.
    Holder, B.: An investigation of hope, academics, environment, and motivation as predictors of persistence in higher education online programs. Internet High. Educ. 10, 245–260 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hung, J.L., Hsu, Y.C., Rice, K.: Integrating data mining in program evaluation of K-12 online education. Educ. Technol. Soc. 15(3), 27–41 (2012)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Levy, Y.: Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Comput. Educ. 48(2), 185–204 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Morris, L.V., Wu, S.-S., Finnegan, C.L.: Predicting retention in online general education courses. Am. J. Distance Educ. 19(1), 23–26 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tello, S.F.: An analysis of student persistence in online education. Int. J. Inf. Commun. Technol. Educ. 3(3), 47–62 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yasmin, J.: Application of the classification tree model in predicting learner dropout behavior in open and distance learning. Distance Educ. 34(2), 218–231 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brett E. Shelton
    • 1
  • Juan Yang
    • 2
  • Jui-Long Hung
    • 1
  • Xu Du
    • 2
  1. 1.Boise State UniversityBoiseUSA
  2. 2.National Engineering Research Center for E-Learning, Central China Normal UniversityWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations