Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 371

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Predicting Student Performance from LMS Data: A Comparison of 17 Blended Courses Using Moodle LMS

Open access
Conijn, Rianne, Snijders, Chris, Kleingeld, Ad, Matzat, Uwe·2017·IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies

Abstract

With the adoption of Learning Management Systems (LMSs) in educational institutions, a lot of data has become available describing students' online behavior. Many researchers have used these data to predict student performance. This has led to a rather diverse set of findings, possibly related to the diversity in courses and predictor variables extracted from the LMS, which makes it hard to draw general conclusions about the mechanisms underlying student performance. We first provide an overview of the theoretical arguments used in learning analytics research and the typical predictors that have been used in recent studies. We then analyze 17 blended courses with 4,989 students in a single institution using Moodle LMS, in which we predict student performance from LMS predictor variables as used in the literature and from in-between assessment grades, using both multi-level and standard regressions. Our analyses show that the results of predictive modeling, notwithstanding the fact that they are collected within a single institution, strongly vary across courses. Thus, the portability of the prediction models across courses is low. In addition, we show that for the purpose of early intervention or when in-between assessment grades are taken into account, LMS data are of little (additional) value. We outline the implications of our findings and emphasize the need to include more specific theoretical argumentation and additional data sources other than just the LMS data.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tlt.2016.2616312

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 59 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. 10.1080/13583883.2005.9967137 · doi:10.1080/13583883.2005.9967137 · Paper page
  2. rafaeli, 0, Online, web-based learning environment for an information systems course: Access logs, linearity and performance, Proc Inf Syst Educ Conf, 97, 92
  3. petropoulou, 0, Helping educators analyse interactions within networked learning communities: A framework and the AnalyticsTool system, Proc 6th Int Conf Netw Learn, 5
  4. rankine, 0, Benchmarking across universities: A framework for LMS analysis, Proc Ann Conf Australian Soc Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, 815
  5. daniels, 2012, CROSSFOLD: Stata module to perform k-fold cross-validation, Statistical Software Components S457426
  6. campbell, 2007, Academic analytics, Educause, 42, 40
  7. long, 0, Announcing open course: Learning and knowledge analytics, Proc 1st Int Conf Learn Analytics Knowl

Cited by

See all 371

Metadata

Authors
Conijn, R., Snijders, C., Kleingeld, A., & Matzat, U.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies
Published
2017-01-01
Volume
10
Issue
1
Pages
17-29
ISSN
1939-1382 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2531767846
Cited by
371
References
59
FWCI
34.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Funders
Centre for Engineering Education (4TU)

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Predicting Student Performance from LMS Data: A Comparison of 17 Blended Courses Using Moodle LMS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tlt.2016.2616312
The paper
Conijn, R., Snijders, C., Kleingeld, A., & Matzat, U. (2017). Predicting Student Performance from LMS Data: A Comparison of 17 Blended Courses Using Moodle LMS. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1109/tlt.2016.2616312

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.