Careless and insufficient effort responding (C/IER) on self‐report measures results in responses that do not reflect the trait to be measured, thereby posing a major threat to the quality of survey data. Reliable approaches for detecting C/IER aid in increasing the validity of inferences being made from survey data. First, once detected, C/IER can be taken into account in data analysis. Second, approaches for detecting C/IER support a better understanding of its occurrence, which facilitates designing surveys that curb the prevalence of C/IER. Previous approaches for detecting C/IER are limited in that they identify C/IER at the aggregate respondent or scale level, thereby hindering investigations of item characteristics evoking C/IER. We propose an explanatory mixture item response theory model that supports identifying and modelling C/IER at the respondent‐by‐item level, can detect a wide array of C/IER patterns, and facilitates a deeper understanding of item characteristics associated with its occurrence. As the approach only requires raw response data, it is applicable to data from paper‐and‐pencil and online surveys. The model shows good parameter recovery and can well handle the simultaneous occurrence of multiple types of C/IER patterns in simulated data. The approach is illustrated on a publicly available Big Five inventory data set, where we found later item positions to be associated with higher C/IER probabilities. We gathered initial supporting validity evidence for the proposed approach by investigating agreement with multiple commonly employed indicators of C/IER.

No abstract

Explanatory item response modeling (EIRM) enables researchers and practitioners to incorporate item and person properties into item response theory (IRT) models. Unlike traditional IRT models, explanatory IRT models can explain common variability stemming from the shared variance among item clusters and person groups. In this tutorial, we present the R package eirm, which provides a simple and easy-to-use set of tools for preparing data, estimating explanatory IRT models based on the Rasch family, extracting model output, and visualizing model results. We describe how functions in the eirm package can be used for estimating traditional IRT models (e.g., Rasch model, Partial Credit Model, and Rating Scale Model), item-explanatory models (i.e., Linear Logistic Test Model), and person-explanatory models (i.e., latent regression models) for both dichotomous and polytomous responses. In addition to demonstrating the general functionality of the eirm package, we also provide real-data examples with annotated R codes based on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale.

As universities around the world have begun to use learning management systems (LMSs), more learning data have become available to gain deeper insights into students' learning processes and make data-driven decisions to improve student learning. With the availability of rich data extracted from the LMS, researchers have turned much of their attention to learning analytics (LA) applications using educational data mining techniques. Numerous LA models have been proposed to predict student achievement in university courses. To design predictive LA models, researchers often follow a data-driven approach that prioritizes prediction accuracy while sacrificing theoretical links to learning theory and its pedagogical implications. In this study, we argue that instead of complex variables (e.g., event logs, clickstream data, timestamps of learning activities), data extracted from online formative assessments should be the starting point for building predictive LA models. Using the LMS data from multiple offerings of an asynchronous undergraduate course, we analysed the utility of online formative assessments in predicting students' final course performance. Our findings showed that the features extracted from online formative assessments (e.g., completion, timestamps and scores) served as strong and significant predictors of students' final course performance. Scores from online formative assessments were consistently the strongest predictor of student performance across the three sections

Traditional screening approaches identify students who might be at risk for academic problems based on how they perform on a single screening measure. However, using multiple screening measures may improve accuracy when identifying at-risk students. The advent of machine learning algorithms has allowed researchers to consider using advanced predictive models to identify at-risk students. The purpose of this study is to investigate if machine learning algorithms can strengthen the accuracy of predictions made from progress monitoring data to classify students as at risk for low mathematics performance. This study used a sample of first-grade students who completed a series of computerized formative assessments (Star Math, Star Reading, and Star Early Literacy) during the 2016–2017 (n = 45,478) and 2017–2018 (n = 45,501) school years. Predictive models using two machine learning algorithms (i.e., Random Forest and LogitBoost) were constructed to identify students at risk for low mathematics performance. The classification results were evaluated using evaluation metrics of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, F1, and Matthews correlation coefficient. Across the five metrics, a multi-measure screening procedure involving mathematics, reading, and early literacy scores generally outperformed single-measure approaches relying solely on mathematics scores. These findings suggest that educators may be able to use a cluster of measures administered once at the beginning of the school year to screen their first grade for at-risk math performance.