Cited by 168Online Learning and AnalyticsIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningSentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining

Population validity for educational data mining models: A case study in affect detection

Ocumpaugh, Jaclyn, Baker, Ryan, Gowda, Sujith, Heffernan, Neil, Heffernan, Cristina·2014·British Journal of Educational Technology

Abstract

Information and communication technology ( ICT )‐enhanced research methods such as educational data mining ( EDM ) have allowed researchers to effectively model a broad range of constructs pertaining to the student, moving from traditional assessments of knowledge to assessment of engagement, meta‐cognition, strategy and affect. The automated detection of these constructs allows EDM researchers to develop intervention strategies that can be implemented either by the software or the teacher. It also allows for secondary analyses of the construct, where the detectors are applied to a data set that is much larger than one that could be analyzed by more traditional methods. However, in many cases, the data used to develop EDM models are collected from students who may not be representative of the broader populations who are likely to use ICT . In order to use EDM models (automated detectors) with new populations, their generalizability must be verified. In this study, we examine whether detectors of affect remain valid when applied to new populations. Models of four educationally relevant affective states were constructed based on data from urban, suburban and rural students using ASSIST ments software for middle school mathematics in the Northeastern U nited S tates. We found that affect detectors trained on a population drawn primarily from one demographic grouping do not generalize to populations drawn primarily from the other demographic groupings, even though those populations might be considered part of the same national or regional culture. Models constructed using data from all three subpopulations are more applicable to students in those populations than those trained on a single group, but still do not achieve ideal population validity—the ability to generalize across all subgroups. In particular, models generalize better across urban and suburban students than rural students. These findings have important implications for data collection efforts, validation techniques, and the design of interventions that are intended to be applied at scale.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/bjet.12156

Cites

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?

  • If particular learner subpopulations or educational contexts are overrepresented in datasets used to train and evaluate models offline, the resulting models may encode associations that fail to generalize to other learners and contexts, and which may even cause harm if deployed in these contexts.

    “If particular learner subpopulations or educational contexts are overrepresented in datasets used to train and evaluate models offline, the resulting models may encode associations that fail to generalize to other learners and contexts, and which may even cause harm if deployed in these contexts (Ocumpaugh”

    From Equity and Artificial Intelligence in Education: Will "AIEd" Amplify or Alleviate Inequities in Education? (2021) · cites this paper as Ocumpaugh, Baker, Gowda, Heffernan, & Heffernan, 2014

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ocumpaugh, J., Baker, R., Gowda, S., Heffernan, N., & Heffernan, C.
Affiliations
Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Ocumpaugh, Jaclyn
Venue
British Journal of Educational Technology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-04
Volume
45
Issue
3
Pages
487-501
ISSN
  • 0007-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8535
OpenAlex
W1918776538
Cited by
168
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 7
FWCI
21.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
British Journal of Educational Technology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining
Keywords
affect recognition, educational data mining, generalizability, urban-rural differences, suburban students, rural students, ASSISTments, junior high school mathematics, affective states, student engagement, intervention design

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