Filtering by
- All Subjects: Education
- Creators: Computer Science and Engineering Program
Education has been at the forefront of many issues in Arizona over the past several years with concerns over lack of funding sparking the Red for Ed movement. However, despite the push for educational change, there remain many barriers to education including a lack of visibility for how Arizona schools are performing at a legislative district level. While there are sources of information released at a school district level, many of these are limited and can become obscure to legislators when such school districts lie on the boundary between 2 different legislative districts. Moreover, much of this information is in the form of raw spreadsheets and is often fragmented between government websites and educational organizations. As such, a visualization dashboard that clearly identifies schools and their relative performance within each legislative district would be an extremely valuable tool to legislative bodies and the Arizona public. Although this dashboard and research are rough drafts of a larger concept, they would ideally increase transparency regarding public information about these districts and allow legislators to utilize the dashboard as a tool for greater understanding and more effective policymaking.
Machine learning is a rapidly growing field, with no doubt in part due to its countless applications to other fields, including pedagogy and the creation of computer-aided tutoring systems. To extend the functionality of FACT, an automated teaching assistant, we want to predict, using metadata produced by student activity, whether a student is capable of fixing their own mistakes. Logs were collected from previous FACT trials with middle school math teachers and students. The data was converted to time series sequences for deep learning, and ordinary features were extracted for statistical machine learning. Ultimately, deep learning models attained an accuracy of 60%, while tree-based methods attained an accuracy of 65%, showing that some correlation, although small, exists between how a student fixes their mistakes and whether their correction is correct.