skip to main content
10.1145/3027385.3027435acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageslakConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Guidance counselor reports of the ASSISTments college prediction model (ACPM)

Published: 13 March 2017 Publication History

Abstract

Advances in the learning analytics community have created opportunities to deliver early warnings that alert teachers and instructors when a student is at risk of not meeting academic goals [6], [71]. Alert systems have also been developed for school district leaders [33] and for academic advisors in higher education [39], but other professionals in the K-12 system, namely guidance counselors, have not been widely served by these systems. In this study, we use college enrollment models created for the ASSISTments learning system [55] to develop reports that target the needs of these professionals, who often work directly with students, but usually not in classroom settings. These reports are designed to facilitate guidance counselors' efforts to help students to set long term academic and career goals. As such, they provide the calculated likelihood that a student will attend college (the ASSISTments College Prediction Model or ACPM), alongside student engagement and learning measures. Using design principles from risk communication research and student feedback theories to inform a co-design process, we developed reports that can inform guidance counselor efforts to support student achievement.

References

[1]
Abikoff, H., Courtney, M., Pelham W., Koplewicz, H. 1993. Teachers' ratings of disruptive behaviors: The influence of halo effects. Journal of Ab. Child Psych., 21(5), 519--533.
[2]
American School Counselor Association (ASCA) 2016a. https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/home/RoleStatement.pdf Accessed October 2016.
[3]
American School Counselor Association (ASCA) 2016b. https://www.schoolcounselor.org/school-counselors-members/careers-roles Accessed October 2016.
[4]
Ancker, J., Kaufman, D. 2007. Rethinking health numeracy: A multidisciplinary literature review. J. American Medical Informatics Association, 14(6), 713--721.
[5]
Ancker, J., Senathirajah, Y., Kukafka, R., Starren, J. 2006. Design features of graphs in health risk communication: A systematic review. J. Am. Med. Infor. Assoc., 13(6), 608--618.
[6]
Arnold, K., & Pistilli, M. 2012. Course signals at Purdue: using learning analytics to increase student success. Proc. 2nd Int'al Conf. Learning Analytics & Knowledge 267--270.
[7]
Arroyo, I., Ferguson, K., Johns, J., Dragon, T., Meheranian, H., Fisher, D., & Woolf, B. P. 2007. Repairing disengagement with non-invasive interventions. AIED, 195--202.
[8]
Arroyo, I., Woolf, B., Burelson, W., Muldner, K., Rai, D., Tai, M. 2014. A multimedia adaptive tutoring system for mathematics that addresses cognition, metacognition and affect. Int 'al J. Artificial Intelligence in Ed., 24(4), 387--426.
[9]
Baadte, C., Schnotz, W. 2014. Feedback effects on performance, motivation & mood: are they moderated by the learner's self-concept?. Scandinavian J. Ed. Res., 58(5), 570--591.
[10]
Baker, R.S.J.d., Corbett, A., Koedinger, K., Evenson, S., Roll, I., Wagner, A, Naim, M., Raspat, J., Baker, D., Beck, J. 2006. Adapting to When Students Game an Intelligent Tutoring System. 8th Int'al Conf. Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 392--401.
[11]
Barry, B. 1984. A comparison of the perceptions of secondary school counselors, principals & teachers regarding the ideal & actual functions of secondary school guidance counselors in Memphis city schools. PhD Memphis State U.
[12]
Broderick, Z., O'Connor C., Mulcahy C., Heffernan, N., & Heffernan C. 2012. Increasing parent engagement in student learning using an intelligent tutoring system. J. Interactive Learning Research. 22(4), 523--550.
[13]
Burnham, J., & Jackson, C. 2000. School counselor roles: Discrepancies between actual practice and existing models. Professional School Counseling, 4(1), 41--49.
[14]
Butler R. 1987. Task-involving & ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. J. Ed. Psych., 79, 474--482.
[15]
Corbett, A., Anderson, J. 1995. Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Modeling & User-Adapted Interaction, 4, 253--278.
[16]
Corwin, Z., Venegas, K., Oliverez, P., Colyar, J. 2004. School counsel how appropriate guidance affects educational equity. Urban Education, 39(4), 442--457.
[17]
Cianci, A., Schaubroeck, J., McGill, G. 2010. Achievement goals, feedback, and task performance. Human Performance, 23(2), 131--154.
[18]
Cicourel, A., Kitsuse, J. 1963. The educational decision makers. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
[19]
Dieckmann, N. F., Slovic, P., Peters, E. 2009. The use of narrative evidence and explicit likelihood by decision makers varying in numeracy. Risk Analysis, 29(10), 1473--1488.
[20]
D'Mello, S., Craig, S, Fike, K, Graesser, A. 2009. Responding to learners' cognitive-affective states with supportive & shakeup dialogues. Human-computer interaction. Ambient, ubiquitous & intelligent interaction. Springer: Berlin, 595--604.
[21]
Dunegan, K. 1996. Fines, frames, and images: Examining formulation effects on punishment decisions. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 68(1), 58--67.
[22]
Dweck, C. 2008. Mindsets and math/science achievement.
[23]
Feng, M., Heffernan, N. 2006. Informing teachers live about student learning: Reporting in the Assistment system. Tech. Instruction Cognition & Learning, 3(1/2), 63.
[24]
Foster, G., Ysseldyke, J. 1976. Expectancy and halo effects as a result of artificially induced teacher bias. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 1(1), 37--45.
[25]
Gerofsky, S. 2011. Ancestral genres of mathematical graphs. For the Learning of Mathematics, 31(1), 14--19.
[26]
Hershkovitz, A., Baker, R.S.J.d., Gobert, J., Wixon, M., Sao Pedro, M. 2013. Discovery with Models: A Case Study on Carelessness in Computer-based Science Inquiry. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(10), 1479--1498.
[27]
Holmes, J. 2008. Effect of Message Framing on Reactions to Feedback Messages, Moderated by Regulatory Focus. MA Thesis. Virginia Tech.
[28]
Hutchinson, R., Barrick, A., Grove, M. 1986. Functions of secondary school counselors in the public schools: Ideal & actual. The School Counselor, 34(2), 87--91.
[29]
Jarvenpaa, S., Dickson, G. 1988. Graphics & managerial decision making: Research based guidelines. Communications of the ACM. 764--774.
[30]
Johnson E., Payne J, Bettman J. 1988. Information displays & preference reversals. Organ. Beh. Human Decis. Process. 42, 1--21.
[31]
Karvonen, K. 2000. The beauty of simplicity. Proc. ACM Universal Usability. 85--90.
[32]
Kluger, A., DeNisi, A. 1996. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a metaanalysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254.
[33]
Knowles, J. 2015. Of needles and haystacks: Building an accurate statewide dropout early warning system in Wisconsin. J. Educational Data Mining, 7(3), 18--67.
[34]
Krenn, B., Würth, S., Hergovich, A. 2013. The impact of feedback on goal setting and task performance. Swiss J. Psych.
[35]
Kosslyn, S.M. 2006. Graph design for the eye and mind. OUP USA.
[36]
Lambie, G., Williamson, L. 2004. The challenge to change from guidance counseling to professional school counseling: A historical proposition. Prof. School Counseling, 124--131.
[37]
Lent, R., Brown, S., Hackett, G. 1994. Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, & performance. J. Voc. Behavior, 45(1), 79--122.
[38]
Levin, I.P., Gaeth, G.J. 1988. How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. J. Consumer Res., 15(3), 374--378.
[39]
Lonn, S., Krumm, A., Waddington, R., Teasley, S. 2012. Bridging the gap from knowledge to action: Putting analytics in the hands of academic advisors. 2nd Int 'al Learning Analytics & Knowledge, 184--187.
[40]
Ma, Y. 2009. Family socioeconomic status, parental involvement, & college major choices---gender, race/ ethnic, & nativity patterns. Sociological Perspectives, 52(2), 211--234.
[41]
McKillip, M., Godfrey, K., Rawls, A. 2012. Rules of engagement: Building a college-going culture in an urban school. Urban Education.
[42]
Misra, R., Mark, J., Khan, S., Kukafka, R. 2010. Using design principles to foster understanding of complex health concepts in consumer informatics tools. AMIA Annual Symposium Proc. 492.
[43]
Mitchell, T.M. 1993. Machine Learning. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
[44]
Molloy, E., Boud, D. 2014. Feedback models for learning, teaching and performance. Handbook of Research on Ed. Comm. & Technology. Springer, NY. 413--424.
[45]
Muldner, K., Wixon, M., Rai, D., Burleson, W., Woolf, B., Arroyo, I. 2015. Exploring the impact of a learning dashboard on student affect. LNCSi. 9112, 307--317.
[46]
Natter, H., Berry, D. 2005. Effects of presenting the baseline risk when communicating absolute and relative risk reductions. Psych, Health & Medicine, 10(4), 326--334.
[47]
Nisbett, R., Wilson, T. 1977. The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. J. Personality & Social Psychology, 35(4), 250.
[48]
Ocumpaugh, J., Baker, R., Gowda, S., Heffernan, N., Heffernan, C. 2014. Population validity for Educational Data Mining models: A case study in affect detection. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45 (3), 487--501.
[49]
Pardos, Z., Baker, R., San Pedro, M.O., Gowda, S., Gowda, S. 2013. Affective states & state tests: Investigating how affect throughout the school year predicts end of year learning outcomes. Proc. 3rd Int'al Conf. Learning Analytics & Knowledge, 117--124.
[50]
Partin, R. 1993. School counselors' time: Where does it go?. The School Counselor, 40(4), 274--281.
[51]
Penuel, W., Roschelle, J., Shechtman, N. 2007. Designing formative assessment software with teachers: An analysis of the co-design process. Research & Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(01), 51--74.
[52]
Perna, L. 2006. Studying college access and choice: A proposed conceptual model. Higher Education, 99--157.
[53]
Razzaq, L., Patvarczki, J., Almeida, S., Vartak, M., Feng, M., Heffernan, N., Koedinger, K. 2009. The Assistment Builder: Supporting the life cycle of tutoring system content creation. IEEE Transactions Learning Tech., 2(2), 157--166.
[54]
Rosenbaum, J., Miller, S., Krei, M. 1996. Gatekeeping in an era of more open gates: High school counselors' views of their influence on students' college plans. Am. J. Ed., 257--79.
[55]
San Pedro, M.O.Z., Baker, R.S.J.d, Bowers, A., Heffernan, N. 2013. Predicting College Enrollment from Student Interaction with an Intelligent Tutoring System in Middle School. 6th Int'al Conf. Educational Data Mining, 177--184.
[56]
San Pedro, M.O.Z., Baker, R., Heffernan, N., Ocumpaugh, J. 2015. Exploring College Major Choice and Middle School Student Behavior, Affect and Learning: What Happens to Students Who Game the System? 5th Int 'al Learning Analytics & Knowledge. 36--40.
[57]
San Pedro, M.O.Z., Ocumpaugh, J., Baker, R., Heffernan, N. 2014. Predicting STEM & Non-STEM College Major Enrollment from Middle School Interaction with Mathematics Educational Software. 7th Int 'al Conf. Educational Data Mining, 276--279.
[58]
Sandefur, G., Meier, A., Campbell, M. 2006. Family resources, social capital, and college attendance. Social Sci. Research, 35(2), 525--553.
[59]
Schwarz, N., Bless, H., Bohner, G., Harlacher, U., Kellen- benz, M. 1991. Response scales as frames of reference: The impact of frequency range on diagnostic judgments. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(1), 37--49.
[60]
Schwabish, J. 2014. An economist's guide to visualizing data. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(1), 209--233.
[61]
Shah, P., Hoeffner, J. 2002. Review of graph comprehension research: Implications for instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 47--69.
[62]
Sharp, J. 2011. Semiotics as a theoretical foundation of information design. Proc. of CONISAR, 1--5.
[63]
Shute, V. 2008. Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153--189.
[64]
Simkin, D., Hastie, R. 1986. An information processing analysis of graph perception. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 82: 454--65.
[65]
Sparrow, J.1989. Graphical displays in information systems: some data properties influencing the effectiveness of alternative forms. Beh. & Information Tech., 8(1), 43--56.
[66]
Tversky, B. 2005. Prolegomenon to scientific visualizations. Visualization in Sci. Ed. Springer: Netherlands, 29--42.
[67]
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D. 1981. The framing of decisions & the psychology of choice. Environ 'al Impact Assessment, Tech. Assessment, & Risk Analysis. Springer: Berlin.107--29.
[68]
Vancouver, J., Tischner, E. 2004. The effect of feedback sign on task performance depends on self-concept discrepancies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 1092.
[69]
Van de Ridder, J., Peters, C., Stokking, K., d Ru, J, tenCate, O. 2015. Framing of feedback impacts student's satisfaction, self-efficacy & performance. Adv. in Health Sci. Ed., 20(3), 803--816.
[70]
Vessey, I. 1991. Cognitive Fit: A Theory-Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature. Dec. Sci., 22:219--40.
[71]
Walonoski, J., Heffernan, N. 2006. Prevention of off-task gaming behavior in intelligent tutoring systems. Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Springer: Berlin. 722--724.
[72]
Wielenga-Meijer, E., Taris, T., Kompier, M., Wigholdus, D. 2010. From task characteristics to learning: A systematic review. Scandinavian J. Psych. 51(5), 363--375.
[73]
Wiliam, D. 2010. The role of formative assessment in effective learning environments. The nature of learning: Using research to inspire practice, 135--155.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Toward Asset-based Instruction and Assessment in Artificial Intelligence in EducationInternational Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education10.1007/s40593-023-00382-x34:4(1559-1598)Online publication date: 16-Jan-2024
  • (2023)Towards a partnership of teachers and intelligent learning technology: A systematic literature review of model‐based learning analyticsJournal of Computer Assisted Learning10.1111/jcal.1284439:5(1397-1417)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2023
  • (2020)Associations Between Learning Analytics Dashboard Exposure and Motivation and Self-Regulated LearningComputers & Education10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104085(104085)Online publication date: Nov-2020
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Guidance counselor reports of the ASSISTments college prediction model (ACPM)

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    LAK '17: Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference
    March 2017
    631 pages
    ISBN:9781450348706
    DOI:10.1145/3027385
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 13 March 2017

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. college attendance
    2. guidance counselors
    3. intelligent tutoring systems
    4. predictive analytics
    5. stakeholder reports
    6. student engagement

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    Conference

    LAK '17
    LAK '17: 7th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference
    March 13 - 17, 2017
    British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

    Acceptance Rates

    LAK '17 Paper Acceptance Rate 36 of 114 submissions, 32%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 236 of 782 submissions, 30%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)129
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10
    Reflects downloads up to 03 Mar 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Toward Asset-based Instruction and Assessment in Artificial Intelligence in EducationInternational Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education10.1007/s40593-023-00382-x34:4(1559-1598)Online publication date: 16-Jan-2024
    • (2023)Towards a partnership of teachers and intelligent learning technology: A systematic literature review of model‐based learning analyticsJournal of Computer Assisted Learning10.1111/jcal.1284439:5(1397-1417)Online publication date: 29-Jun-2023
    • (2020)Associations Between Learning Analytics Dashboard Exposure and Motivation and Self-Regulated LearningComputers & Education10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104085(104085)Online publication date: Nov-2020
    • (2019)Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Area Under the Curve (AUC): A Diagnostic Measure for Evaluating the Accuracy of Predictors of Education OutcomesJournal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR)10.1080/10824669.2018.1523734(1-25)Online publication date: 29-Jan-2019
    • (2017)Learning Analytics: at the Nexus of Big Data, Digital Innovation, and Social Justice in EducationTechTrends10.1007/s11528-017-0226-962:1(37-45)Online publication date: 10-Oct-2017

    View Options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Login options

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media