Assessing Students’ Learning when Interpreting Histograms: A Gaze-Based Machine Learning Analysis

L.B.M.M. Boels, Alex Lyford, Arthur Bakker, P. Drijvers
{"title":"Assessing Students’ Learning when Interpreting Histograms: A Gaze-Based Machine Learning Analysis","authors":"L.B.M.M. Boels, Alex Lyford, Arthur Bakker, P. Drijvers","doi":"10.14786/flr.v11i2.1139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Students consistently misinterpret histograms. Statistics education literature suggests that solving dotplot items can support correct histogram interpretations. We therefore explore how students’ micro-level histogram interpretations alter during assessment, with the research question: In what way do Grades 10–12 pre-university track students’ histogram interpretations change after solving dotplot items? Students were asked to estimate or compare arithmetic means. Students’ gaze data, answers, and stimulated recall interview data were collected. We used students’ gaze data on four histogram items as inputs for a machine learning algorithm (MLA; random forests). Our MLA can quite accurately classify if students’ gaze data belong to an item solved before or after the dotplot items. Moreover, we found that the direction (e.g., almost vertical) and length of students’ saccades were different on the before and after items. A change in this perceptual form could therefore indicate a change in strategies. Two more indications of actual learning were found. This study is novel in three ways: a novel use of spatial gaze data, use of a MLA for finding differences in gazes that are relevant for changes in students’ topic specific strategy and the first that investigates students’ micro-learning during an assessment. We consider a most likely explanation for the results that the action of solving dotplot items creates readiness for learning and that reflecting on the solution strategy during recall then brings new insights. This study is important for theories on readiness for learning and practice effects, and it has implications for large-scale assessments and homework.","PeriodicalId":37057,"journal":{"name":"Frontline Learning Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontline Learning Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v11i2.1139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Students consistently misinterpret histograms. Statistics education literature suggests that solving dotplot items can support correct histogram interpretations. We therefore explore how students’ micro-level histogram interpretations alter during assessment, with the research question: In what way do Grades 10–12 pre-university track students’ histogram interpretations change after solving dotplot items? Students were asked to estimate or compare arithmetic means. Students’ gaze data, answers, and stimulated recall interview data were collected. We used students’ gaze data on four histogram items as inputs for a machine learning algorithm (MLA; random forests). Our MLA can quite accurately classify if students’ gaze data belong to an item solved before or after the dotplot items. Moreover, we found that the direction (e.g., almost vertical) and length of students’ saccades were different on the before and after items. A change in this perceptual form could therefore indicate a change in strategies. Two more indications of actual learning were found. This study is novel in three ways: a novel use of spatial gaze data, use of a MLA for finding differences in gazes that are relevant for changes in students’ topic specific strategy and the first that investigates students’ micro-learning during an assessment. We consider a most likely explanation for the results that the action of solving dotplot items creates readiness for learning and that reflecting on the solution strategy during recall then brings new insights. This study is important for theories on readiness for learning and practice effects, and it has implications for large-scale assessments and homework.
在解释直方图时评估学生的学习:基于注视的机器学习分析
学生们总是误解直方图。统计教育文献表明,解决点图项目可以支持正确的直方图解释。因此,我们探讨了学生在评估过程中微观层面的直方图解释是如何变化的,研究问题是:10-12年级的大学预科学生在解决点图项目后如何跟踪学生的直方图解释变化?学生们被要求估计或比较算术平均值。收集学生的注视数据、回答数据和刺激回忆访谈数据。我们使用学生在四个直方图项目上的凝视数据作为机器学习算法(MLA;随机森林)。我们的MLA可以非常准确地分类学生的注视数据是属于在点图项目之前还是之后解决的项目。此外,我们发现学生的扫视方向(如几乎垂直)和长度在项目前和项目后是不同的。因此,这种感知形式的变化可能表明策略的变化。另外还发现了两个实际学习的迹象。这项研究在三个方面是新颖的:空间凝视数据的新颖使用,使用MLA来寻找与学生主题特定策略变化相关的凝视差异,以及第一个在评估期间调查学生微学习的研究。我们认为最可能的解释是,解决点图项目的行为创造了学习的准备,而在回忆过程中反思解决策略则带来了新的见解。本研究对学习准备和实践效果的理论研究具有重要意义,并对大规模评估和家庭作业具有指导意义。
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
Frontline Learning Research
Frontline Learning Research Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信