Machine Learning Classifiers Do Not Improve the Prediction of Academic Risk: Evidence from Australia

Sarah Cornell-Farrow, Robert Garrard

arXiv 19 Jul 2018 · Statistics — Machine Learning

arXiv:1807.07215 · PDF · DOI · OpenAlex · Extracted main text

Abstract

Machine learning methods tend to outperform traditional statistical models at prediction. In the prediction of academic achievement, ML models have not shown substantial improvement over logistic regression. So far, these results have almost entirely focused on college achievement, due to the availability of administrative datasets, and have contained relatively small sample sizes by ML standards. In this article we apply popular machine learning models to a large dataset ($n=1.2$ million) containing primary and middle school performance on a standardized test given annually to Australian students. We show that machine learning models do not outperform logistic regression for detecting students who will perform in the `below standard' band of achievement upon sitting their next test, even in a large-$n$ setting.

Citation extraction

appendix boundary found by none_found · 100% of the source is main text. Read the extracted text to check this.

Most heavily cited references

The works this paper leans on most, across its whole bibliography — not restricted to papers in our corpus. Ranked by composite intensity, which combines how often a work is mentioned, how many sections mention it, and how much of that falls in the main text rather than the appendix.

Showing the top 10 of 31 scored citations.