Prediction of Dilatory Behavior in eLearning: A Comparison of Multiple Machine Learning Models

被引:2
|
作者
Imhof, Christof [1 ]
Comsa, Ioan-Sorin [1 ]
Hlosta, Martin [1 ]
Parsaeifard, Behnam [1 ]
Moser, Ivan [1 ]
Bergamin, Per [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Swiss Distance Univ Appl Sci, Inst Res Open Distance & eLearning, CH-3900 Brig, Switzerland
[2] North West Univ, ZA-2531 Potchefstroom, South Africa
来源
关键词
Dilatory behavior; learning analytics (LA); machine learning (ML); predictive performance; procrastination; Delays; Predictive models; Behavioral sciences; Prediction algorithms; Task analysis; Data models; Classification algorithms; ACTIVE PROCRASTINATION; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1109/TLT.2022.3221495
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Procrastination, the irrational delay of tasks, is a common occurrence in online learning. Potential negative consequences include a higher risk of drop-outs, increased stress, and reduced mood. Due to the rise of learning management systems (LMS) and learning analytics (LA), indicators of such behavior can be detected, enabling predictions of future procrastination and other dilatory behavior. However, research focusing on such predictions is scarce. Moreover, studies involving different types of predictors and comparisons between the predictive performance of various methods are virtually nonexistent. In this article, we aim to fill these research gaps by analyzing the performance of multiple machine learning algorithms when predicting the delayed or timely submission of online assignments in a higher education setting with two categories of predictors: 1) subjective, questionnaire-based variables and 2) objective, log-data-based indicators extracted from a learning management system. The results show that models with objective predictors consistently outperform models with subjective predictors, and a combination of both variable types performs slightly better with an accuracy of 70%. For each of these three options, a different approach prevailed (gradient boosting machines for the subjective, Bayesian multilevel models for the objective, and Random Forest for the combined predictors). We conclude that careful attention should be paid to the selection of predictors and algorithms before implementing such models in learning management systems.
引用
收藏
页码:648 / 663
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Machine Learning Models Comparison for Bitcoin Price Prediction
    Phaladisailoed, Thearasak
    Numnonda, Thanisa
    PROCEEDINGS OF 2018 THE 10TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING (ICITEE), 2018, : 506 - 511
  • [2] Performance Comparison of Machine Learning Models for Diabetes Prediction
    Cihan, Pinar
    Coskun, Hakan
    29TH IEEE CONFERENCE ON SIGNAL PROCESSING AND COMMUNICATIONS APPLICATIONS (SIU 2021), 2021,
  • [3] A Comparison of Machine Learning Models in Electron Output Prediction
    Box, J.
    Ahmad, S.
    Chen, Y.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2020, 47 (06) : E676 - E676
  • [4] Application and Comparison of Multiple Machine Learning Models in Finance
    Jiang, Yali
    SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMMING, 2022, 2022
  • [5] Machine learning regression models for prediction of multiple ionospheric parameters
    Iban, Muzaffer Can
    Senturk, Erman
    ADVANCES IN SPACE RESEARCH, 2022, 69 (03) : 1319 - 1334
  • [6] Interpretable Machine Learning Models for Prediction of UHPC Creep Behavior
    Zhu, Peng
    Cao, Wenshuo
    Zhang, Lianzhen
    Zhou, Yongjun
    Wu, Yuching
    Ma, Zhongguo John
    BUILDINGS, 2024, 14 (07)
  • [7] Methodological comparison of machine learning models for childhood asthma prediction
    Patel, D.
    Gupta, R.
    Smirg, A.
    Foong, R.
    RESPIROLOGY, 2023, 28 : 124 - 124
  • [8] Comparison of Machine learning models for Parkinson's Disease prediction
    Kumar, Tapan
    Sharma, Pradyumn
    Prakash, Nupur
    2020 11TH IEEE ANNUAL UBIQUITOUS COMPUTING, ELECTRONICS & MOBILE COMMUNICATION CONFERENCE (UEMCON), 2020, : 195 - 199
  • [9] Comparison Of Rectal Temperature Prediction Models Utilizing Machine Learning
    Belval, Luke N.
    Hosokawa, Yuri
    Vandermark, Lesley W.
    Stearns, Rebecca L.
    Armstrong, Lawrence E.
    Casa, Douglas J.
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2017, 49 (05): : 454 - 454
  • [10] Grapevine Phenology Prediction: A Comparison of Physical and Machine Learning Models
    Lacueva-Perez, Francisco J.
    Ilarri, Sergio
    Barriuso, Juan J.
    Balduque, Joaquin
    Labata, Gorka
    del-Hoyo, Rafael
    BIG DATA ANALYTICS AND KNOWLEDGE DISCOVERY, DAWAK 2022, 2022, 13428 : 263 - 269