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 accessAbstract
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x018001032 · Cited by 13,645 · cited 1×
“However, the match between these theories and the measurements used for learning analytics is not optimal and other theories such as situated learning [24] or”
BackgroundHattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905
(2008) · Cited by 6,939
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 · Cited by 5,882
Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.91.3.328 · Cited by 4,161
Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0026838 · Cited by 3,646 · cited 3×
“important predictors of student success [15], [42].”
BackgroundHattie, J. (2008) · doi:10.4324/9780203887332 · Cited by 3,051
Editorial: Three types of interaction
Moore, M. G. (1989) · American Journal of Distance Education · doi:10.1080/08923648909526659 · Cited by 2,471
Educational Data Mining: A review of the state of the art
Romero, C., & Ventura, S. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part C (Applications and Reviews) · doi:10.1109/tsmcc.2010.2053532 · Cited by 2,251
Studying as Self-Regulated Learning
(1998) · Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice · doi:10.4324/9781410602350-19 · Cited by 1,589
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- 10.1080/13583883.2005.9967137 · doi:10.1080/13583883.2005.9967137 · Paper page
- rafaeli, 0, Online, web-based learning environment for an information systems course: Access logs, linearity and performance, Proc Inf Syst Educ Conf, 97, 92
- petropoulou, 0, Helping educators analyse interactions within networked learning communities: A framework and the AnalyticsTool system, Proc 6th Int Conf Netw Learn, 5
- rankine, 0, Benchmarking across universities: A framework for LMS analysis, Proc Ann Conf Australian Soc Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, 815
- daniels, 2012, CROSSFOLD: Stata module to perform k-fold cross-validation, Statistical Software Components S457426
- campbell, 2007, Academic analytics, Educause, 42, 40
- long, 0, Announcing open course: Learning and knowledge analytics, Proc 1st Int Conf Learn Analytics Knowl
Cited by
Utilising learning analytics to support study success in higher education: a systematic review
Ifenthaler, D., & Yau, J. Y.-K. (2020) · Educational Technology Research and Development · doi:10.1007/s11423-020-09788-z · Cited by 659
Postdigital Education in Design and Practice
Fawns, T. (2019) · Postdigital Science and Education · doi:10.1007/s42438-018-0021-8 · Cited by 365
Predicting academic performance: a systematic literature review
Hellas, A., Ihantola, P., Petersen, A., Ajanovski, V. V., Gutica, M., Hynninen, T., Knutas, A., Leinonen, J., Messom, C., & Liao, S. N. (2018) · Proceedings Companion of the 23rd Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education · doi:10.1145/3293881.3295783 · Cited by 355
A systematic review on trends in using Moodle for teaching and learning
Gamage, S. H. P. W., Ayres, J. R., & Behrend, M. B. (2022) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-021-00323-x · Cited by 360
Azcona, D., Hsiao, I.-H., & Smeaton, A. F. (2019) · User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction · doi:10.1007/s11257-019-09234-7 · Cited by 114
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.