Risk-based student performance prediction model for engineering courses

IF 2 3区 工程技术 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Verónica J. Abuchar, Carlos A. Arteta, Jose L. De La Hoz, Camilo Vieira
{"title":"Risk-based student performance prediction model for engineering courses","authors":"Verónica J. Abuchar,&nbsp;Carlos A. Arteta,&nbsp;Jose L. De La Hoz,&nbsp;Camilo Vieira","doi":"10.1002/cae.22757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>High academic failure and dropout rates in engineering courses are significant worldwide concerns attributed to various factors, with academic performance being a critical variable. This article provides a methodology to estimate the performance risk of students in engineering schools. Risk analysis is a strategy to evaluate academic success, which provides a set of methods to analyze, understand, and predict student outcomes before enrolling in specific majors or challenging college courses. This article develops a methodology to estimate fragility curves for students entering an engineering course. The fragility function concept, borrowed from the earthquake engineering field, estimates the likelihood of success in a course, given relevant student metadata, such as the grade point average, thus comprehensively addressing student performance variability. A student academic success prediction model enables instructional designers to make informed decisions. For example, fragility curves can help achieve two goals: (i) assessing the population at risk for a course to take actions to improve student success rates and (ii) assessing a course's relative difficulty based on its fragility function parameters. We demonstrate this methodology through a case study comparing the relative difficulty of two engineering courses, Statics and Solid Mechanics, at a university in Colombia. Given that Statics serves as a prerequisite for Solid Mechanics, deficiencies in the former can significantly impact student performance in the latter. The case study results reveal that Solid Mechanics poses a higher risk of academic failure than Statics, underscoring the importance of a strong foundation in prerequisite courses.</p>","PeriodicalId":50643,"journal":{"name":"Computer Applications in Engineering Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Applications in Engineering Education","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cae.22757","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

High academic failure and dropout rates in engineering courses are significant worldwide concerns attributed to various factors, with academic performance being a critical variable. This article provides a methodology to estimate the performance risk of students in engineering schools. Risk analysis is a strategy to evaluate academic success, which provides a set of methods to analyze, understand, and predict student outcomes before enrolling in specific majors or challenging college courses. This article develops a methodology to estimate fragility curves for students entering an engineering course. The fragility function concept, borrowed from the earthquake engineering field, estimates the likelihood of success in a course, given relevant student metadata, such as the grade point average, thus comprehensively addressing student performance variability. A student academic success prediction model enables instructional designers to make informed decisions. For example, fragility curves can help achieve two goals: (i) assessing the population at risk for a course to take actions to improve student success rates and (ii) assessing a course's relative difficulty based on its fragility function parameters. We demonstrate this methodology through a case study comparing the relative difficulty of two engineering courses, Statics and Solid Mechanics, at a university in Colombia. Given that Statics serves as a prerequisite for Solid Mechanics, deficiencies in the former can significantly impact student performance in the latter. The case study results reveal that Solid Mechanics poses a higher risk of academic failure than Statics, underscoring the importance of a strong foundation in prerequisite courses.

基于风险的工程学课程学生成绩预测模型
工程学课程中的高学业失败率和辍学率是全世界关注的重要问题,其原因是多方面的, 其中学业成绩是一个关键变量。本文提供了一种估算工科院校学生成绩风险的方法。风险分析是一种评估学业成功与否的策略,它提供了一套在学生进入特定专业或学习具有挑战性的大学课程之前分析、了解和预测学生结果的方法。本文开发了一种方法,用于估算进入工程课程学习的学生的脆性曲线。脆性函数的概念借鉴自地震工程领域,它根据相关的学生元数据(如平均学分绩点)来估算课程成功的可能性,从而全面解决学生成绩的可变性问题。学生学业成功预测模型可以帮助教学设计者做出明智的决策。例如,脆弱性曲线可以帮助实现两个目标:(i) 评估一门课程的高危人群,以便采取行动提高学生的成功率;(ii) 根据脆性函数参数评估一门课程的相对难度。我们通过一个案例研究,比较了哥伦比亚一所大学的两门工程学课程《静力学》和《固体力学》的相对难度,从而展示了这一方法。鉴于静力学是固体力学的先修课程,前者的不足会严重影响学生在后者中的表现。案例研究结果表明,与《静力学》相比,《实体力学》造成学业失败的风险更高,这凸显了先修课程打下坚实基础的重要性。
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
Computer Applications in Engineering Education
Computer Applications in Engineering Education 工程技术-工程:综合
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
100
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Computer Applications in Engineering Education provides a forum for publishing peer-reviewed timely information on the innovative uses of computers, Internet, and software tools in engineering education. Besides new courses and software tools, the CAE journal covers areas that support the integration of technology-based modules in the engineering curriculum and promotes discussion of the assessment and dissemination issues associated with these new implementation methods.
×
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