Computing Reviews
Today's Issue Hot Topics Search Browse Recommended My Account Log In
Review Help
Course correction: using analytics to predict course success
Barber R., Sharkey M.  LAK 2012 (Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, Vancouver, BC, Canada, Apr 29-May 2, 2012)259-262.2012.Type:Proceedings
Date Reviewed: Nov 8 2012

Learning analytics (LA) is a very hot topic that can be used to assess academic progress and predict future performance. The latest Horizon Report suggests that the time-to-adoption of LA by educational institutions will be around two to three years [1]. Thus, a lot of research and development initiatives are currently underway.

This interesting and well-written paper demonstrates a predictive analytic model for identifying students who are in danger of failing a course. It was created for the needs of the University of Phoenix.

Barber and Sharkey begin with a discussion of various known reasons students fail to graduate, as well as indicators that help identify a student that may have a tendency to fail. The authors show how they fine-tuned their model through three versions over several runs by adding variables. As a result, the Model 2 version accurately predicted 85 percent of outcomes for all students at week 0 (compared to 50 percent in Model 1).

The authors consider how LA can help teachers, educational managers, and students to predict course failure. LA can also be seen from other perspectives. For example, the outcome of this process can help instructional designers to better measure the quality of a course design and understand what works and what does not work [2]. In addition, LA can improve assessment of student performance by analyzing various indicators such as student postings and grades on assignments [3].

Adopting LA techniques is not easy. Stakeholders need usable analysis tools such as SNAPP [4] and NodeXL [5].

The development of new models like this one, as well as new techniques and tools, will undoubtedly help stakeholders analyze and interpret data about student progress and learning behavior.

Reviewer:  Symeon Retalis Review #: CR140659 (1302-0126)
1) New Media Consortium. NMC Horizon Report: 2012 Higher Education Edition. Accessed 10/21/2012.
2) Martínez, A.; Dimitriadis, Y.; de la Fuente, P. Computers and education: towards a lifelong learning society. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 2003.
3) Daradoumis, T.; Martínez , A.; Xhafa , F. A layered framework for evaluating on-line collaborative learning interactions. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 64, 7(2006), 622–635.
4) , SNAPP (10/21/2012).
5) , NodeXL (10/21/2012).
Bookmark and Share
  Editor Recommended
Featured Reviewer
Probability And Statistics (G.3 )
Collaborative Learning (K.3.1 ... )
Education (J.1 ... )
Computer Uses in Education (K.3.1 )
Languages (H.2.3 )
Systems (H.2.4 )
Would you recommend this review?
Other reviews under "Probability And Statistics": Date
Probabilities from fuzzy observations
Yager R. (ed) Information Sciences 32(1): 1-31, 1984. Type: Article
Mar 1 1985
Randomness conservation inequalities; information and independence in mathematical theories
Levin L. Information and Control 61(1): 15-37, 1984. Type: Article
Sep 1 1985
The valuing of management information. Part I: the Bayesian approach
Carter M. Journal of Information Science 10(1): 1-9, 1985. Type: Article
May 1 1986

E-Mail This Printer-Friendly
Send Your Comments
Contact Us
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.   Copyright 1999-2023 ThinkLoud®
Terms of Use
| Privacy Policy