Difference Between Successful and Failed Students Learned from Analytics of Weekly Learning Check Testing
Abstract
One of the crucial issues in universities where a variety of enrolled students shall be educated to a level of university diploma policy is to identify students at risk for failing courses and/or dropping out early, to take care of them, and to reduce their risks. Using the recently developed follow-up program system aimed at helping students who need basic learning and aimed at assisting teachers who have to engage in teaching a variety of educational students, we can analyze the accumulated testing results in detail because the testings are performed every week to all the first-year undergraduate students. We have found that those who failed in the final examination show the much steeper decreasing trend of correct answer rates in the learning check testing comparing to those who were successful in the final examination. Although the subjects dealt with in this paper are limited to mathematics (calculus and linear algebra), this kind of system will easily be applied to other subjects such as STEM.
References
R. de Ayala, The Theory and Practice of Item Response Theory. Guilford Press, 2009.
N. Elouazizi, Critical Factors in Data Governance for Learning Analytics, Journal of Learning Analytics, 1, 2014, pp. 211-222.
D. Gasevic, S. Dawson, and G. Siemens, Let’s not forget: Learning analytics are about learning, TechTrends, 59, 2015, pp. 64-71.
R. Hambleton, H. Swaminathan, and H. J. Rogers, Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Sage Publications, 1991.
H. Hirose and T. Sakumura, Test evaluation system via the web using the item response theory, in Computer and Advanced Technology in Education, 2010, pp.152-158.
H. Hirose, T. Sakumura, Item Response Prediction for Incomplete Response Matrix Using the EM-type Item Response Theory with Application to Adaptive Online Ability Evaluation System, IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering, 2012, pp.8-12.
H. Hirose, Yu Aizawa, Automatically Growing Dually Adaptive Online IRT Testing System, IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering, 2014, pp.528-533.
H. Hirose, Y. Tokusada, K. Noguchi, Dually Adaptive Online IRT Testing System with Application to High-School Mathematics Testing Case, IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering, 2014, pp.447-452.
H. Hirose, Y. Tokusada, A Simulation Study to the Dually Adaptive Online IRT Testing System, IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering, 2014, pp.97-102.
H. Hirose, Meticulous Learning Follow-up Systems for Undergraduate Students Using the Online Item Response Theory, 5th International Conference on Learning Technologies and Learning Environments, 2016, pp.427-432.
H. Hirose, M. Takatou, Y. Yamauchi, T. Taniguchi, T. Honda, F. Kubo, M. Imaoka, T. Koyama, Questions and Answers Database Construction for Adaptive Online IRT Testing Systems: Analysis Course and Linear Algebra Course, 5th International Conference on Learning Technologies and Learning Environments, 2016, pp.433-438.
H. Hirose, Learning Analytics to Adaptive Online IRT Testing Systems “Ai Arutte” Harmonized with University Textbooks, 5th International Conference on Learning Technologies and Learning Environments, 2016, pp.439-444.
Hideo Hirose, Dually Adaptive Online IRT Testing System, Bulletin of Informatics and Cybernetics Research Association of Statistical Sciences, 48, 2016, pp.1-17.
W. J. D. Linden and R. K. Hambleton, Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. Springer, 1996.
T. Sakumura and H. Hirose, Making up the Complete Matrix from the Incomplete Matrix Using the EM-type IRT and Its Application, Transactions on Information Processing Society of Japan (TOM), 72, 2014, pp.17-26.
T. Sakumura, H. Hirose, Bias Reduction of Abilities for Adaptive Online IRT Testing Systems, International Journal of Smart Computing and Artificial Intelligence (IJSCAI), 1, 2017, pp.57-70.
G. Siemens and D. Gasevic, Guest Editorial - Learning and Knowledge Analytics, Educational Technology & Society, 15, 2012, pp.1-2.
Y. Tokusada, H. Hirose, Evaluation of Abilities by Grouping for Small IRT Testing Systems, 5th International Conference on Learning Technologies and Learning Environments, 2016, pp.445-449.
R. J. Waddington, S. Nam, S. Lonn, S.D. Teasley, , Improving Early Warning Systems with Categorized Course Resource Usage, Journal of Learning Analytics, 3, 2016, 263-290.
A.F. Wise and D.W. Shaffer, Why Theory Matters More than Ever in the Age of Big Data, Journal of Learning Analytics, 2, pp. 5-13, 2015.
Fundamental Statistics of Japanese Higher Education, http://www.mext.go.jp/bmenu/toukei/chousa01/kihon/1267995.htm, 2016.
