Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3657604.3662028acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesl-at-sConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open access

Gaining Insights into Group-Level Course Difficulty via Differential Course Functioning

Published: 15 July 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Curriculum Analytics (CA) studies curriculum structure and student data to ensure the quality of educational programs. One desirable property of courses within curricula is that they are not unexpectedly more difficult for students of different backgrounds. While prior work points to likely variations in course difficulty across student groups, robust methodologies for capturing such variations are scarce, and existing approaches do not adequately decouple course-specific difficulty from students' general performance levels. The present study introduces Differential Course Functioning (DCF) as an Item Response Theory (IRT)-based CA methodology. DCF controls for student performance levels and examines whether significant differences exist in how distinct student groups succeed in a given course. Leveraging data from over 20,000 students at a large public university, we demonstrate DCF's ability to detect inequities in undergraduate course difficulty across student groups described by grade achievement. We compare major pairs with high co-enrollment and transfer students to their non-transfer peers. For the former, our findings suggest a link between DCF effect sizes and the alignment of course content to student home department motivating interventions targeted towards improving course preparedness. For the latter, results suggest minor variations in course-specific difficulty between transfer and non-transfer students. While this is desirable, it also suggests that interventions targeted toward mitigating grade achievement gaps in transfer students should encompass comprehensive support beyond enhancing preparedness for individual courses. By providing more nuanced and equitable assessments of academic performance and difficulties experienced by diverse student populations, DCF could support policymakers, course articulation officers, and student advisors.

References

[1]
Carmen Aina, Eliana Baici, Giorgia Casalone, and Francesco Pastore. 2022. The determinants of university dropout: A review of the socio-economic literature. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Vol. 79 (2022), 101102.
[2]
Hayward P Andres. 2019. Active teaching to manage course difficulty and learning motivation. Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 43, 2 (2019), 220--235.
[3]
Tapio Auvinen, Juha Paavola, and Juha Hartikainen. 2014. STOPS: a graph-based study planning and curriculum development tool. In Proceedings of the 14th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research (Koli, Finland) (Koli Calling '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 25--34.
[4]
Silvia Bacci, Francesco Bartolucci, Leonardo Grilli, and Carla Rampichini. 2017. Evaluation of student performance through a multidimensional finite mixture IRT model. Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 52, 6 (2017), 732--746.
[5]
Michael Backenköhler and Felix Scherzinger et al. 2018. Data-Driven Approach towards a Personalized Curriculum. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Educational Data Mining. International Educational Data Mining Society, Raleigh, NC, 246--251.
[6]
Frederik Baucks, Robin Schmucker, and Laurenz Wiskott. 2024. Gaining Insights into Course Difficulty Variations Using Item Response Theory. In LAK24: 14th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 450--461. https://doi.org/10.1145/3636555.3636902
[7]
Frederik Baucks and Laurenz Wiskott. 2022. Simulating Policy Changes In Prerequisite-Free Curricula: A Supervised Data-Driven Approach. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Educational Data Mining. International Educational Data Mining Society, Durham, UK, 470.
[8]
Frederik Baucks and Laurenz Wiskott. 2023. Mitigating Biases using an Additive Grade Point Model: Towards Trustworthy Curriculum Analytics Measures. In Proceedings of the 21th Fachtagung Bildungstechnologien (DELFI). Gesellschaft fuer Informatik e.V., Aachen, Germany, 41--52.
[9]
Conrad Borchers and Zachary A Pardos. 2023. Insights into undergraduate pathways using course load analytics. In LAK23: 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 219--229.
[10]
Ryan Bronkema and Nicholas A Bowman. 2017. A residential paradox?: Residence hall attributes and college student outcomes. Journal of College Student Development, Vol. 58, 4 (2017), 624--630.
[11]
Michael Brown, R Matthew DeMonbrun, and Stephanie Teasley. 2018. Taken Together: Conceptualizing Students' Concurrent Course Enrollment across the Post-Secondary Curriculum Using Temporal Analytics. Journal of Learning Analytics, Vol. 5, 3 (2018), 60--72.
[12]
R Philip Chalmers. 2012. mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of statistical Software, Vol. 48 (2012), 1--29.
[13]
Jehanzeb R Cheema. 2019. Cross-country gender DIF in PISA science literacy items. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, Vol. 16, 2 (2019), 152--166.
[14]
Karl Bang Christensen, Guido Makransky, and Mike Horton. 2017. Critical values for Yen's Q 3: Identification of local dependence in the Rasch model using residual correlations. Applied psychological measurement, Vol. 41, 3 (2017), 178--194.
[15]
Allan S Cohen, Seock-Ho Kim, and James A Wollack. 1996. An investigation of the likelihood ratio test for detection of differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 20, 1 (1996), 15--26.
[16]
Patricia Dinis Da Costa and Luísa Araújo. 2012. Differential Item Functioning (DIF): What Functions Differently for Immigrant Students in PISA 2009 Reading Items. JRC Scientific and Policy Report. European Commission, Luxembourg.
[17]
Rafael Jaime De Ayala. 2013. The theory and practice of item response theory. Guilford, New York, NY, USA.
[18]
Benjamin J England, Jennifer R Brigati, Elisabeth E Schussler, and Miranda M Chen. 2019. Student anxiety and perception of difficulty impact performance and persistence in introductory biology courses. CBE-Life Sciences Education, Vol. 18, 2 (2019), ar21.
[19]
Veronica L Fematt, Ryan P Grimm, Karen Nylund-Gibson, Michael M Gerber, Mary Betsy Brenner, and Daniel Solórzano. 2021. Identifying transfer student subgroups by academic and social adjustment: a latent class analysis. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, Vol. 45, 3 (2021), 167--183.
[20]
Christian Fischer, Zachary A Pardos, Ryan Shaun Baker, Joseph Jay Williams, Padhraic Smyth, Renzhe Yu, Stefan Slater, Rachel Baker, and Mark Warschauer. 2020. Mining big data in education: Affordances and challenges. Review of Research in Education, Vol. 44, 1 (2020), 130--160.
[21]
Joshua Gardner, Renzhe Yu, Quan Nguyen, Christopher Brooks, and Rene Kizilcec. 2023. Cross-Institutional Transfer Learning for Educational Models: Implications for Model Performance, Fairness, and Equity. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1664--1684.
[22]
Marcel R Haas, Colin Caprani, and Benji van Beurden. 2023. Bayesian Generative Modelling of Student Results in Course Networks. Journal of Learning Analytics, Vol. 10, 3 (2023), 135--152.
[23]
Telle Hailikari, Nina Katajavuori, and Sari Lindblom-Ylanne. 2008. The relevance of prior knowledge in learning and instructional design. American journal of pharmaceutical education, Vol. 72, 5 (2008), 113.
[24]
John Hansen, Philip Sadler, and Gerhard Sonnert. 2019. Estimating High School GPA Weighting Parameters With a Graded Response Model. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, Vol. 38, 1 (2019), 16--24.
[25]
Terry T Ishitani. 2008. How do transfers survive after "transfer shock"? A longitudinal study of transfer student departure at a four-year institution. Research in Higher Education, Vol. 49, 5 (2008), 403--419.
[26]
Weijie Jiang, Zachary A Pardos, and Qiang Wei. 2019. Goal-based course recommendation. In Proceedings of the 9th international conference on learning analytics & knowledge. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 36--45.
[27]
Michael G Jodoin and Mark J Gierl. 2001. Evaluating type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied measurement in education, Vol. 14, 4 (2001), 329--349.
[28]
Matthew D Johnson. 2005. Academic performance of transfer versus" native" students in natural resources & sciences. College Student Journal, Vol. 39, 3 (2005), 570--580.
[29]
Taehoon Kang and Allan S Cohen. 2007. IRT model selection methods for dichotomous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 31, 4 (2007), 331--358.
[30]
Lale Khorramdel, Artur Pokropek, Seang-Hwane Joo, Irwin Kirsch, and Laura Halderman. 2020. Examining gender DIF and gender differences in the PISA 2018 reading literacy scale: A partial invariance approach. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling, Vol. 62, 2 (2020), 179--231.
[31]
Luc T Le. 2009. Investigating gender differential item functioning across countries and test languages for PISA science items. International Journal of Testing, Vol. 9, 2 (2009), 122--133.
[32]
Juan Antonio Mart'inez-Carrascal, Jorge Munoz-Gama, and Teresa Sancho-Vinuesa. 2023. Evaluation of Recommended Learning Paths using Process Mining and Log Skeletons: Conceptualization and Insight into an Online Mathematics Course. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, Vol. 17 (2023), 555--568.
[33]
John McEneaney and Paul Morsink. 2022. Curriculum Modelling and Learner Simulation as a Tool in Curriculum (Re) Design. Journal of Learning Analytics, Vol. 9, 2 (2022), 161--178.
[34]
Gonzalo Mendez, Xavier Ochoa, Katherine Chiluiza, and Bram de Wever. 2014. Curricular Design Analysis: A Data-Driven Perspective. Journal of Learning Analytics, Vol. 1, 3 (Nov. 2014), 84--119.
[35]
Roland Molontay, Noémi Horváth, Júlia Bergmann, Dóra Szekrényes, and Mihály Szabó. 2020. Characterizing curriculum prerequisite networks by a student flow approach. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, Vol. 13, 3 (2020), 491--501.
[36]
Xavier Ochoa. 2016. Simple metrics for curricular analytics. In Proceedings of the 1st learning analytics for curriculum and program quality improvement workshop, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 1590. CEUR-WS, Aachen, 20--26.
[37]
Zachary A. Pardos, Hung Chau, and Haocheng Zhao. 2019. Data-Assistive Course-to-Course Articulation Using Machine Translation. In Proceedings of the Sixth (2019) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (Chicago, IL, USA). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--10.
[38]
Zachary A Pardos and Andrew Joo Hun Nam. 2020. A university map of course knowledge. PloS one, Vol. 15, 9 (2020), e0233207.
[39]
Sunil Sabnis, Renzhe Yu, and René F. Kizilcec. 2022. Large-Scale Student Data Reveal Sociodemographic Gaps in Procrastination Behavior. In Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (New York City, NY, USA) (L@S '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 133--141.
[40]
Juan Pablo Salazar-Fernandez, Marcos Sepúlveda, Jorge Munoz-Gama, and Miguel Nussbaum. 2021. Curricular analytics to characterize educational trajectories in high-failure rate courses that lead to late dropout. Applied Sciences, Vol. 11, 4 (2021), 1436.
[41]
Andreas Schleicher. 2019. PISA 2018: Insights and interpretations. Technical Report. OECD.
[42]
Benjamin R Shear. 2023. Gender Bias in Test Item Formats: Evidence from PISA 2009, 2012, and 2015 Math and Reading Tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, Vol. 60 (2023), 676--696. Issue 4.
[43]
Ahmad Slim, Gregory L Heileman, Jarred Kozlick, and Chaouki T Abdallah. 2014. Employing markov networks on curriculum graphs to predict student performance. In 13th International Conference on Machine Learning & Applications. IEEE, IEEE, Detroit, MI, USA, 415--418.
[44]
Ana Paula Soares, Adelina M Guisande, Leandro S Almeida, and Fernanda M Páramo. 2009. Academic achievement in first-year Portuguese college students: The role of academic preparation and learning strategies. International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 44, 3 (2009), 204--212.
[45]
Namrata Srivastava, Sadia Nawaz, Yi-Shan Tsai, and Dragan Gasevic. 2024. Curriculum Analytics of Course Choices: Links with Academic Performance. Journal of Learning Analytics, Vol. 11, 1 (2024), 1--16.
[46]
Jason L Taylor and Dimpal Jain. 2017. The multiple dimensions of transfer: Examining the transfer function in American higher education. Community College Review, Vol. 45, 4 (2017), 273--293.
[47]
David Thissen, Lynne Steinberg, and Daniel Kuang. 2002. Quick and Easy Implementation of the Benjamini-Hochberg Procedure for Controlling the False Positive Rate in Multiple Comparisons. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Vol. 27, 1 (2002), 77--83. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986027001077
[48]
University of California. 2023. University of California Accountability Report 2021. https://accountability.universityofcalifornia.edu/. Accessed: 04/22/24.
[49]
Suraj Uttamchandani and Joshua Quick. 2022. An introduction to fairness, absence of bias, and equity in learning analytics. Society of Learning Analytics Research, Vancouver, Chapter 20, 205--212.
[50]
Wim J van der Linden and Ronald K Hambleton. 2013. Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. Springer, New York, NY, USA.
[51]
Miriam Wagner, Hayyan Helal, Rene Roepke, Sven Judel, Jens Doveren, Sergej Goerzen, Pouya Soudmand, Gerhard Lakemeyer, Ulrik Schroeder, and Wil MP van der Aalst. 2023. A Combined Approach of Process Mining and Rule-based AI for Study Planning and Monitoring in Higher Education. In Process Mining Workshops. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, 513--525.
[52]
Wendy M Yen. 1993. Scaling performance assessments: Strategies for managing local item dependence. Journal of educational measurement, Vol. 30, 3 (1993), 187--213.
[53]
John W Young. 1990. Adjusting the cumulative GPA using item response theory. Journal of educational measurement, Vol. 27, 2 (1990), 175--186.
[54]
Renzhe Yu, Hansol Lee, and René F. Kizilcec. 2021. Should College Dropout Prediction Models Include Protected Attributes?. In Proceedings of the Eighth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (Virtual Event, Germany) (L@S '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 91--100.
[55]
Olga Zlatkin-Troitschanskaia, Jasmin Schlax, Judith Jitomirski, Roland Happ, Carla Kühling-Thees, Sebastian Brückner, and Hans A Pant. 2019. Ethics and fairness in assessing learning outcomes in higher education. Higher Education Policy, Vol. 32 (2019), 537--556.

Index Terms

  1. Gaining Insights into Group-Level Course Difficulty via Differential Course Functioning

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    L@S '24: Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale
    July 2024
    582 pages
    ISBN:9798400706332
    DOI:10.1145/3657604
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 15 July 2024

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. curriculum analytics
    2. differential item functioning
    3. higher education
    4. item response theory

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    • KI:edu.nrw

    Conference

    L@S '24

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 117 of 440 submissions, 27%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 125
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)125
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)45
    Reflects downloads up to 14 Oct 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Get Access

    Login options

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media