...
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Psychology >Contrasting Classical and Machine Learning Approaches in the Estimation of Value-Added Scores in Large-Scale Educational Data
【24h】

Contrasting Classical and Machine Learning Approaches in the Estimation of Value-Added Scores in Large-Scale Educational Data

机译:对比大规模教育数据中增值分数估算的古典和机器学习方法

获取原文
           

摘要

There is no consensus on which statistical model estimates school value-added (VA) most accurately. To date, the two most common statistical models used for the calculation of VA scores are two classical methods: linear regression and multilevel models. These models have the advantage of being relatively transparent and thus understandable for most researchers and practitioners. However, these statistical models are bound to certain assumptions (e.g., linearity) that might limit their prediction accuracy. Machine learning methods, which have yielded spectacular results in numerous fields, may be a valuable alternative to these classical models. Although big data is not new in general, it is relatively new in the realm of social sciences and education. New types of data require new data analytical approaches. Such techniques have already evolved in fields with a long tradition in crunching big data (e.g., gene technology). The objective of the present paper is to competently apply these “imported” techniques to education data, more precisely VA scores, and assess when and how they can extend or replace the classical psychometrics toolbox. The different models include linear and nonlinear methods and extend classical models with the most commonly used machine learning methods (i.e., random forest, neural networks, support vector machines, and boosting). We used representative data of 3,026 students in 153 schools who took part in the standardized achievement tests of the Luxembourg School Monitoring Program in grades 1 and 3. Multilevel models outperformed classical linear and polynomial regressions, as well as different machine learning models. However, it could be observed that across all schools, school VA scores from different model types correlated highly. Yet, the percentage of disagreements as compared to multilevel models was not trivial and real-life implications for individual schools may still be dramatic depending on the model type used. Implications of these results and possible ethical concerns regarding the use of machine learning methods for decision-making in education are discussed.
机译:没有达成共识,统计模型最准确地估计学校增值(VA)。迄今为止,用于计算VA分数的两个最常见的统计模型是两个古典方法:线性回归和多级模型。这些模型具有相对透明的优点,从而可以理解大多数研究人员和从业者。然而,这些统计模型涉及可能限制其预测精度的某些假设(例如,线性度)。机器学习方法在许多领域产生了壮观的结果,这可能是对这些古典模型的有价值的替代品。虽然大数据不是新的一般,但它在社会科学和教育领域相对较新。新类型的数据需要新的数据分析方法。这些技术已经在嘎吱嘎吱的大数据(例如,基因技术)中具有漫长传统的领域。本文的目的是竞争地将这些“导入”技术应用于教育数据,更准确地说,VA分数,并评估它们何时以及如何扩展或更换经典的精神仪器工具箱。不同的型号包括线性和非线性方法,并通过最常用的机器学习方法扩展经典模型(即随机森林,神经网络,支持向量机和升压)。我们在153所学校使用了3,026名学生的代表数据,该学校参与了卢森堡学校监测计划的标准化成就试验,以1和3年级的卢森堡学校监测计划。多级模型表现优于古典线性和多项式回归,以及不同的机器学习模型。然而,可以观察到所有学校,学校VA来自不同模型类型的分数高度相关。然而,与多级模型相比,分歧的百分比并不是琐碎,而且对个人学校的实际影响可能仍然是戏剧性的,具体取决于所用的模型类型。讨论了这些结果的影响以及对使用机器学习方法进行教育决策的可能性的道德问题。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号