↓ Skip to main content

Automating Individualized Formative Feedback in Large Classes Based on a Directed Concept Graph

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Automating Individualized Formative Feedback in Large Classes Based on a Directed Concept Graph
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00260
Pubmed ID
Authors

Henry E. Schaffer, Karen R. Young, Emily W. Ligon, Diane D. Chapman

Abstract

Student learning outcomes within courses form the basis for course completion and time-to-graduation statistics, which are of great importance in education, particularly higher education. Budget pressures have led to large classes in which student-to-instructor interaction is very limited. Most of the current efforts to improve student progress in large classes, such as "learning analytics," (LA) focus on the aspects of student behavior that are found in the logs of Learning Management Systems (LMS), for example, frequency of signing in, time spent on each page, and grades. These are important, but are distant from providing help to the student making insufficient progress in a course. We describe a computer analytical methodology which includes a dissection of the concepts in the course, expressed as a directed graph, that are applied to test questions, and uses performance on these questions to provide formative feedback to each student in any course format: face-to-face, blended, flipped, or online. Each student receives individualized assistance in a scalable and affordable manner. It works with any class delivery technology, textbook, and learning management system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Master 8 12%
Professor 7 10%
Lecturer 5 7%
Other 16 24%
Unknown 15 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 16 24%
Computer Science 9 13%
Unspecified 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 4%
Other 16 24%
Unknown 17 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 February 2020.
All research outputs
#4,777,589
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,747
of 31,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,025
of 312,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#199
of 511 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 511 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.