Utilizing Student Time Series Behaviour in Learning Management Systems for Early Prediction of Course Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predictive analytics in higher education has become increasingly popular in recent years with the growing availability of educational big data. Particularly, a wealth of student activity data is available from learning management systems (LMSs) in most academic institutions. However, previous investigations into predictive analytics in higher education using LMS activity data did not adequately accommodate student behaviours in the form of time series. In this study, we have applied a deep learning approach — long short-term memory (LSTM) networks — to analyze student online temporal behaviours using their LMS data for the early prediction of course performance. To reveal the potential of the deep learning approach in predictive analytics, we compared LSTM networks with eight conventional machine learning classifiers in terms of the prediction performance as measured by the area under the ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curve (AUC) scores. Results indicate that using the deep learning approach, time series information about click frequencies successfully provided early detection of at-risk students with moderate prediction accuracy. In addition, the deep learning approach showed higher prediction performance and stronger generalizability than the machine learning classifiers.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".