Improved fuzzy modelling to predict the academic performance of distance education students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is essential to predict distance education students’ year-end academic performance early during the course of the semester and to take precautions using such prediction-based information. This will, in particular, help enhance their academic performance and, therefore, improve the overall educational quality. The present study was on the development of a mathematical model intended to predict distance education students’ year-end academic performance using the first eight-week data on the learning management system. First, two fuzzy models were constructed, namely the classical fuzzy model and the expert fuzzy model, the latter being based on expert opinion. Afterwards, a gene-fuzzy model was developed optimizing membership functions through genetic algorithm. The data on distance education were collected through Moodle, an open source learning management system. The data were on a total of 218 students who enrolled in Basic Computer Sciences in 2012. The input data consisted of the following variables: When a student logged on to the system for the last time after the content of a lesson was uploaded, how often he/she logged on to the system, how long he/she stayed online in the last login, what score he/she got in the quiz taken in Week 4, and what score he/she got in the midterm exam taken in Week 8. A comparison was made among the predictions of the three models concerning the students’ year-end academic performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".