Inconsistencies in the Definition and Annotation of Student Engagement in Virtual Learning Datasets: A Critical Review
August 09, 2022 Β· Declared Dead Β· + Add venue
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Shehroz S. Khan, Ali Abedi, Tracey Colella
arXiv ID
2208.04548
Category
cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction
Cross-listed
cs.CV
Citations
1
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Background: Student engagement (SE) in virtual learning can have a major impact on meeting learning objectives and program dropout risks. Developing Artificial Intelligence (AI) models for automatic SE measurement requires annotated datasets. However, existing SE datasets suffer from inconsistent definitions and annotation protocols mostly unaligned with the definition of SE in educational psychology. This issue could be misleading in developing generalizable AI models and make it hard to compare the performance of these models developed on different datasets. The objective of this critical review was to explore the existing SE datasets and highlight inconsistencies in terms of differing engagement definitions and annotation protocols. Methods: Several academic databases were searched for publications introducing new SE datasets. The datasets containing students' single- or multi-modal data in online or offline computer-based virtual learning sessions were included. The definition and annotation of SE in the existing datasets were analyzed based on our defined seven dimensions of engagement annotation: sources, data modalities, timing, temporal resolution, level of abstraction, combination, and quantification. Results: Thirty SE measurement datasets met the inclusion criteria. The reviewed SE datasets used very diverse and inconsistent definitions and annotation protocols. Unexpectedly, very few of the reviewed datasets used existing psychometrically validated scales in their definition of SE. Discussion: The inconsistent definition and annotation of SE are problematic for research on developing comparable AI models for automatic SE measurement. Some of the existing SE definitions and protocols in settings other than virtual learning that have the potential to be used in virtual learning are introduced.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Human-Computer Interaction
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Identifying Stable Patterns over Time for Emotion Recognition from EEG
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User Experiences
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Learning for Sensor-based Human Activity Recognition: Overview, Challenges and Opportunities
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Educational data mining and learning analytics: An updated survey
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted