Cited by 270Sentiment Analysis and Opinion MiningEvaluation of Teaching PracticesEducational Technology and Pedagogy

Mining opinions from instructor evaluation reviews: a deep learning approach

Onan, Aytuğ·2020·Computer Applications in Engineering Education

Abstract

Abstract Student evaluations of teaching (SET) provides potentially essential source of information to achieve educational quality objectives of higher educational institutions. The findings can be utilized as a measure of teaching effectiveness and they may aid the administrative decision‐making process. The purpose of our research is to establish an efficient sentiment classification scheme on instructor evaluation reviews by pursuing the paradigm of deep learning. Deep learning is a recent research direction of machine learning, which seeks to identify a classification scheme with higher predictive performance based on multiple layers of nonlinear information processing. In this study, we present a recurrent neural network (RNN) based model for opinion mining on instructor evaluation reviews. We analyze a corpus containing 154,000 such reviews, with the use of conventional machine learning algorithms, ensemble learning methods, and deep learning architectures. In the empirical analysis, three conventional text representation schemes (namely, term‐presence, term‐frequency [TF], and TF‐inverse document frequency schemes) and four word embedding schemes (namely, word2vec, global vector [GloVe], fastText, and LDA2Vec) have been taken into consideration. The predictive performance of supervised machine learning methods (such as, Naïve Bayes, support vector machines, logistic regression, K‐nearest neighbor, and random forest) and three ensemble learning methods have been examined on word embedding schemes. The extensive empirical analysis indicates that deep learning‐based architectures outperform the conventional machine learning classifiers for the task of sentiment classification on instructor reviews. For the RNN with attention mechanism in conjunction with GloVe word embedding scheme‐based representation a classification accuracy of 98.29% has been obtained.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cae.22179

Cites

72 of 72 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Machine learning and deep learning algorithms can help with teacher evaluation by performing sentiment analysis of student comments on teacher performance.

    “Machine learning and deep learning algorithms can help with teacher evaluation by performing sentiment analysis of student comments on teacher performance (Esparza et al., 2017; Gutiérrez et al., 2018; Onan, 2020), which provides a snapshot of student attitudes toward teachers and their overall learning experiences.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Onan, A.
Affiliations
Izmir Kâtip Çelebi University (TR)
Corresponding author
Onan, Aytuğ
Venue
Computer Applications in Engineering Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-11-06
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
117-138
ISSN
  • 1061-3773 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0542
OpenAlex
W2988589399
Cited by
270
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 44 · 2020: 12
FWCI
14.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computer Applications in Engineering Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
  • Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Technology and Pedagogy
Keywords
student evaluations of teaching, sentiment classification, sentiment analysis, recurrent neural networks, attention mechanism, word embeddings, gloves, teaching effectiveness, higher education quality

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review