Towards more replicable content analysis for learning analytics

Kirsty Kitto, Catherine A. Manly, Rebecca Ferguson, Oleksandra Poquet
{"title":"Towards more replicable content analysis for learning analytics","authors":"Kirsty Kitto, Catherine A. Manly, Rebecca Ferguson, Oleksandra Poquet","doi":"10.1145/3576050.3576096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Content analysis (CA) is a method frequently used in the learning sciences and so increasingly applied in learning analytics (LA). Despite this ubiquity, CA is a subtle method, with many complexities and decision points affecting the outcomes it generates. Although appearing to be a neutral quantitative approach, coding CA constructs requires an attention to decision making and context that aligns it with a more subjective, qualitative interpretation of data. Despite these challenges, we increasingly see the labels in CA-derived datasets used as training sets for machine learning (ML) methods in LA. However, the scarcity of widely shareable datasets means research groups usually work independently to generate labelled data, with few attempts made to compare practice and results across groups. A risk is emerging that different groups are coding constructs in different ways, leading to results that will not prove replicable. We report on two replication studies using a previously reported construct. A failure to achieve high inter-rater reliability suggests that coding of this scheme is not currently replicable across different research groups. We point to potential dangers in this result for those who would use ML to automate the detection of various educationally relevant constructs in LA.","PeriodicalId":394433,"journal":{"name":"LAK23: 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference","volume":"102 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LAK23: 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3576050.3576096","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Content analysis (CA) is a method frequently used in the learning sciences and so increasingly applied in learning analytics (LA). Despite this ubiquity, CA is a subtle method, with many complexities and decision points affecting the outcomes it generates. Although appearing to be a neutral quantitative approach, coding CA constructs requires an attention to decision making and context that aligns it with a more subjective, qualitative interpretation of data. Despite these challenges, we increasingly see the labels in CA-derived datasets used as training sets for machine learning (ML) methods in LA. However, the scarcity of widely shareable datasets means research groups usually work independently to generate labelled data, with few attempts made to compare practice and results across groups. A risk is emerging that different groups are coding constructs in different ways, leading to results that will not prove replicable. We report on two replication studies using a previously reported construct. A failure to achieve high inter-rater reliability suggests that coding of this scheme is not currently replicable across different research groups. We point to potential dangers in this result for those who would use ML to automate the detection of various educationally relevant constructs in LA.
为学习分析提供更多可复制的内容分析
内容分析(Content analysis, CA)是一种在学习科学中经常使用的方法,在学习分析(learning analytics, LA)中的应用也越来越广泛。尽管CA无处不在,但它是一种微妙的方法,有许多复杂性和决策点影响它生成的结果。尽管看起来是一种中立的定量方法,编码CA结构需要注意决策制定和上下文,使其与更主观的、定性的数据解释保持一致。尽管存在这些挑战,我们越来越多地看到ca衍生数据集中的标签被用作LA机器学习(ML)方法的训练集。然而,缺乏广泛共享的数据集意味着研究小组通常独立工作来生成标记数据,很少尝试跨小组比较实践和结果。一种风险正在显现,即不同的团队以不同的方式对结构进行编码,导致无法证明可复制的结果。我们报告了使用先前报道的结构的两个重复研究。未能达到较高的评级间可靠性表明,该方案的编码目前无法在不同的研究小组之间复制。我们指出,对于那些在洛杉矶使用ML来自动检测各种教育相关结构的人来说,这个结果存在潜在的危险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信