Difference between revisions of "Socioeconomic Status"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(added Kung & Yu (2020)) |
|||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
*Whether the socio-demographic information was included or not, the model showed worse accuracy and true negative rates for residential students with greater financial needs | *Whether the socio-demographic information was included or not, the model showed worse accuracy and true negative rates for residential students with greater financial needs | ||
*The model showed better recall for students with greater financial needs, especially for those studying in person | *The model showed better recall for students with greater financial needs, especially for those studying in person | ||
Kung & Yu (2020) | |||
[https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3386527.3406755 pdf] | |||
* Predicting course grades and later GPA at public U.S. university | |||
* Equal performance for low-income and upper-income students in course grade prediction for several algorithms and metrics | |||
* Worse performance on independence for low-income students than high-income students in later GPA prediction for four of five algorithms; one algorithm had worse separation and two algorithms had worse sufficiency |
Revision as of 09:45, 13 June 2022
Yudelson et al. (2014) pdf
- Models discovering generalizable sub-populations of students across different schools to predict students' learning with Carnegie Learning’s Cognitive Tutor (CLCT)
- Models trained on schools with a high proportion of low-SES student performed worse than those trained with medium or low proportion
- Models trained on schools with low, medium proportion of SES students performed similarly well for schools with high proportions of low-SES students
Yu et al. (2020) pdf
- Models predicting undergraduate course grades and average GPA
- Students from low-income households were inaccurately predicted to perform worse for both short-term (final course grade) and long-term (GPA)
- Fairness of model improved if it included only clickstream and survey data
Yu et al. (2021) pdf
- Models predicting college dropout for students in residential and fully online program
- Whether the socio-demographic information was included or not, the model showed worse accuracy and true negative rates for residential students with greater financial needs
- The model showed better recall for students with greater financial needs, especially for those studying in person
Kung & Yu (2020)
pdf
- Predicting course grades and later GPA at public U.S. university
- Equal performance for low-income and upper-income students in course grade prediction for several algorithms and metrics
- Worse performance on independence for low-income students than high-income students in later GPA prediction for four of five algorithms; one algorithm had worse separation and two algorithms had worse sufficiency