skip to main content
10.1145/3362789.3362880acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesteemConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Evolution of Decision Tree Classifiers in Open Ended Educational Data Mining

Authors Info & Claims
Published:16 October 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Educational Data Mining (EDM) aims to produce new knowledge from educational settings to support educators, learners and other stakeholders. EDM aims to facilitate the understanding of the educational context by utilizing different methods of statistics and machine learning. Like wise to the current trends in data mining, also EDM approaches have shifted from black box tools and algorithms to more open-ended tools and algorithms where the EDM end-users can adjust multiple parameters, view visualizations, and even adjust the predictive models. Multiple studies have shown that the EDM end-users benefit from the white box approaches and tools. We introduce the concept of Augmented Intelligence (AUI) method in EDM. AUI method is applied in an iterative process where a white box machine learning algorithm generates a predictive model, which is adjustable by the EDM end-user. The adjustable predictive model affects to the perception of the end-user and the adjusting affects to the output of the predictive model. When applied in cycles, the AUI method generates new knowledge from the educational context. To study AUI method, a potential EDM end-user generated multiple adjustable decision tree models and we observed the evolution of the models. The study indicates that, over time, the models generalize better and the AUI method helps to avoid the issue of overfitting. Moreover, the study indicates that the cyclic nature of the AUI method facilitates deeper knowledge generation from the dataset, if the context is known by the end-user.

References

  1. Ryan Shaun Baker and Paul Salvador Inventado. 2014. Educational data mining and learning analytics. In Learning analytics. Springer, 61--75.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Ryan SJD Baker and Kalina Yacef. 2009. The state of educational data mining in 2009: A review and future visions. JEDM| Journal of Educational Data Mining 1, 1 (2009), 3--17Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Meurig Beynon. 1998. Empirical modelling and the foundations of artificial intelligence. In International Workshop on Computation for Metaphors, Analogy, and Agents. Springer, 322--365.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Meurig Beynon and Chris Roe. 2004. Computer support for constructionism in context. In IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, 2004. Proceedings. IEEE, 216--220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. WM Beynon. 1997. Empirical modelling for educational technology. In Proceedings Second International Conference on Cognitive Technology Humanizing the Information Age. IEEE, 54--68.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Félix Castro, Alfredo Vellido, Angela Nebot, and Francisco Mugica. 2007. Applying data mining techniques to e-learning problems. In Evolution of teaching and learning paradigms in intelligent environment. Springer, 183--221.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Boris Delibasic, Milan Vukicevic, and MILO Jovanovic. 2013. White- box decision tree algorithms: A pilot study on perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and perceived understanding. International Journal of Engineering Education 29, 3 (2013), 674--687.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Ashish Dutt, Saeed Aghabozrgi, Maizatul Akmal Binti Ismail, and Hamidreza Mahroeian. 2015. Clustering algorithms applied in educa- tional data mining. International Journal of Information and Electronics Engineering 5, 2 (2015), 112.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Ashish Dutt, Maizatul Akmar Ismail, and Tutut Herawan. 2017. A systematic review on educational data mining. IEEE Access 5 (2017), 15991--16005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Monika Goyal and Rajan Vohra. 2012. Applications of data mining in higher education. International Journal of Computer Science Issues (IJCSI) 9, 2 (2012), 113.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. David Gunning. 2017. Explainable artificial intelligence (xai). Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), nd Web 2 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Mark Hall, Eibe Frank, Geoffrey Holmes, Bernhard Pfahringer, Peter Reutemann, and Ian H Witten. 2009. The WEKA data mining software: an update. ACM SIGKDD explorations newsletter 11, 1 (2009), 10--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Wilhelmiina Hämäläinen and Mikko Vinni. 2010. Classifiers for ed- ucational data mining. Handbook of educational data mining (2010), 57--74.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Markus Hofmann and Ralf Klinkenberg. 2013. RapidMiner: Data mining use cases and business analytics applications. CRC Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Rajni Jindal and Malaya Dutta Borah. 2013. A survey on educational data mining and research trends. International Journal of Database Management Systems 5, 3 (2013), 53.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Ilkka Jormanainen. 2013. Supporting teachers in unpredictable robotics learning environments. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Eastern Finland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ilkka Jormanainen and Antony Harfield. 2008. Supporting the teacher in educational robotics classes: work in progress. In The 16th International Conference on Computers in Education. 931--934.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Ilkka Jormanainen and Erkki Sutinen. 2012. Using data mining to support teacher's intervention in a robotics class. In 2012 IEEE Fourth International Conference On Digital Game And Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning. IEEE, 39--46.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Ilkka Jormanainen and Erkki Sutinen. 2014. Role blending in a learning environment supports facilitation in a robotics class. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 17, 1 (2014), 294--306.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Parneet Kaur, Manpreet Singh, and Gurpreet Singh Josan. 2015. Clas- sification and prediction based data mining algorithms to predict slow learners in education sector. Procedia Computer Science 57 (2015), 500--508.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Vitomir Kovanović, Srećko Joksimović, Philip Katerinopoulos, Charalampos Michail, George Siemens, and Dragan Gašević. 2017. De- veloping a MOOC experimentation platform: Insights from a user study. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference. ACM, 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Leslie Lamport. 1986. LATEX: A Document Preparation System. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MAGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Agathe Merceron and Kalina Yacef. 2005. Educational Data Mining: a Case Study.. In AIED. 467--474.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Agathe Merceron and Kalina Yacef. 2005. Tada-ed for educational data mining. Interactive multimedia electronic journal of computer-enhanced. learning 7, 1 (2005), 267--287.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. ] Mahesh Pal. 2005. Random forest classifier for remote sensing classification. International Journal of Remote Sensing 26, 1 (2005), 217--222Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Cristobal Romero and Sebastian Ventura. 2007. Educational data min- ing: A survey from 1995 to 2005. Expert systems with applications 33, 1 (2007), 135--146.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. William B Rouse and James C Spohrer. 2018. Automating versus augmenting intelligence. Journal of Enterprise Transformation (2018), 1--21.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. George Siemens and Ryan SJ d Baker. 2012. Learning analytics and educational data mining: towards communication and collaboration. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on learning analytics and knowledge. ACM, 252--254.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Stefan Slater, Srećko Joksimović, Vitomir Kovanovic, Ryan S Baker, and Dragan Gasevic. 2017. Tools for educational data mining: A review. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 42, 1 (2017), 85--106.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Pascal Soucy and Guy W Mineau. 2001. A simple KNN algorithm for text categorization. In Proceedings 2001 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining. IEEE, 647--648.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Tapani Toivonen, Ilkka Jormanainen, Calkin Suero Montero, and An- drea Alessandrini. 2018. Innovative Maker Movement Platform for K-12 Education as a Smart Learning Environment. In Challenges and Solutions in Smart Learning. Springer, 61--66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Wei Zhangand, Shiming Qin..2018.A brief analysis of the key technologies and applications of educational data mining on online learning platform. In 2018 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Big Data Analysis (ICBDA). IEEE, 83--86.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  1. Evolution of Decision Tree Classifiers in Open Ended Educational Data Mining

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      TEEM'19: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality
      October 2019
      1085 pages
      ISBN:9781450371919
      DOI:10.1145/3362789

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      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 ACM 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: 16 October 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate496of705submissions,70%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader