Students Behavioural Analysis in an Online Learning Environment Using Data Mining (ICIAfS)
Authors: I. P. Ratnapala, R. G. Ragel, S. Deegalla
AI-generated Key Points
- The study aimed to use Educational Data Mining (EDM) techniques to conduct a quantitative analysis of 412 students' interaction with an e-learning system through instructor-led non-graded and graded courses.
- The research was conducted to establish guidelines for a series of online short courses for the students.
- More than 40% of the student group were passive online learners in both graded and non-graded learning environments.
- The difference in learning environments could change the online access behaviour of a student group.
- Clustering divided the student population into five access groups based on their course access behaviour, with the least access group (NG-41% and G-42%) and highest access group (NG-9% and G-5%) being identified very clearly due to their distinct variation from other groups.
- This research provides valuable insights into how different types of e-learning environments can impact student engagement levels, which can inform future development of online courses to better support active learning strategies.
Abstract: The focus of this research was to use Educational Data Mining (EDM) techniques to conduct a quantitative analysis of students interaction with an e-learning system through instructor-led non-graded and graded courses. This exercise is useful for establishing a guideline for a series of online short courses for them. A group of 412 students' access behaviour in an e-learning system were analysed and they were grouped into clusters using K-Means clustering method according to their course access log records. The results explained that more than 40% from the student group are passive online learners in both graded and non-graded learning environments. The result showed that the difference in the learning environments could change the online access behaviour of a student group. Clustering divided the student population into five access groups based on their course access behaviour. Among these groups, the least access group (NG-41% and G-42%) and the highest access group (NG-9% and G-5%) could be identified very clearly due to their access variation from the rest of the groups.
Tools for this paper
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
We compare the title and abstract with papers indexed in our database. For arXiv papers, we search within the same category; for DOI and other sources, we search across sources and subjects. You can rerun the search as our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.