Asking the Right Questions to Nominate A Student as Gifted and Talented: A Machine Learning Approach

Year 2020, Volume: 13 Issue: 4, 385 - 400, 30.10.2020

Elif Kartal Melodi Özyaprak Zeki Özen İrfan Şimşek Sezer Köse Biber Mahir Biber Tuncer Can

https://doi.org/10.17671/gazibtd.591158

Cited By: 1

Abstract

In this study, it is aimed to reduce the number of questions from a 69-item scale, which is developed to nominate a student as gifted and talented by selecting the most effective questions. For this purpose, Recursive Feature Elimination and Chi-Square Filter feature selection methods are used. Also, it is aimed to find the best performing machine learning algorithm to nominate a student as gifted and talented in this study. To achieve this, analyses are performed with Random Forest Algorithm, C4.5 Decision Tree Algorithm, and Naive Bayes Classifier machine learning algorithms. As a result of the analyses; the 69-item scale was reduced to 20 questions by using Chi-Square Filter method, and then when Naive Bayes Classifier was applied to this new data set, the model nominated a student with 92% accuracy as gifted and talented. It is thought that the proposed model will save time in the nomination process and prevent the distraction of attention that can be caused by the high number of questions when teachers fill out the scale. Also, it is believed that more rational decisions will be made in the nomination process by working with data-based prediction models.

Keywords

gifted and talented students, feature selection, machine learning, nomination

Supporting Institution

Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit of İstanbul University

Project Number

23538 and 26087

Thanks

This study was supported by Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit of İstanbul University. Project numbers 23538 and 26087

Bir Öğrenciyi Üstün Zekâlı ve Yetenekli Olarak Aday Göstermek İçin Doğru Soruları Sormak: Bir Makine Öğrenmesi Yaklaşımı

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, bir öğrencinin üstün zekâlı ve yetenekli olarak aday gösterilmesi için geliştirilen 69 soruluk ölçekten öğretmenin kararında en etkili soruların seçilerek ölçekteki soru sayısının azaltılması amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla Nitelik Eleme ve Ki-kare Filtresi nitelik seçimi yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Ayrıca çalışmada bir öğrenciyi üstün zekâlı ve yetenekli olarak aday göstermede en iyi performansı veren makine öğrenmesi algoritmasının bulunması da hedeflenmiştir. Bunu gerçekleştirebilmek için Rastgele Orman Algoritması, C4.5 Karar Ağacı Algoritması ve Naive Bayes Sınıflandırıcı makine öğrenmesi algoritmaları kullanılmıştır. Analizler sonucunda Ki-kare Filtresi yöntemiyle 69 soruluk ölçek 20 soruya indirilmiş, sonrasında Naive Bayes Sınıflandırıcı bu yeni veri setine uygulandığında, model %92 doğrulukla bir öğrenciyi üstün zekâlı ve yetenekli olarak aday göstermiştir. Önerilen bu modelin, aday gösterme sürecinde zamandan tasarruf edilmesini sağlayacağı ve ölçeğin öğretmenler tarafından doldurulması esnasında çok sayıda soruyla ilgilenmekten kaynaklı dikkat dağınıklığını önleyerek sonuçların doğruluğunu artıracağı düşünülmektedir. Ayrıca, veriye dayalı öngörü modellerinin aday gösterme sürecinde kullanılmasıyla daha rasyonel kararlar elde edileceğine inanılmaktadır.

Keywords

üstün zekâlı ve yetenekli öğrenciler, nitelik seçimi, makine öğrenmesi, aday gösterme

Project Number

23538 and 26087

References

• K. Eklund, N. Tanner, K. Stoll, L. Anway, “Identifying emotional and behavioral risk among gifted and nongifted children: A multi-gate, multi-informant approach”, Sch. Psychol. Q., 30(2), 197–211, 2015.
• C. Fonseca, Emotional Intensity in Gifted Students: Helping Kids Cope With Explosive Feelings, 2nd ed. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, 2016.
• H. Peyre et al., “Emotional, behavioral and social difficulties among high-IQ children during the preschool period: Results of the EDEN mother–child cohort”, Personal. Individ. Differ., 94, 366–371, 2016.
• W. Vialle, K. B. Rogers, “Gifted, talented or educationally disadvantaged?”, in Future directions for inclusive teacher education: An international perspective, C. Forlin, Ed. London: Routledge, 112–120, 2012.
• F. Gagné, “Debating giftedness: Pronat vs. antinat”, in International handbook on giftedness, L. V. Shavinina, Ed. New York: Springer, 155–198, 2009.
• R. F. Subotnik, “Developmental transitions in giftedness and talent: Adolescence into adulthood”, in The development of giftedness and talent across the life span, F. D. Horowitz, R. F. Subotnik, and D. J. Matthews, Eds. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 155–170, 2009.
• K. Anderson, Gifted and talented students: Meeting their needs in New Zealand Schools, Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media Limited, 2000.
• New Brunswick Department of Education, “Gifted and Talented Students A Resource Guide for Teachers”, 2007.
• C. Elliott et al., Teaching Students Who Are Gifted and Talented A Handbook for Teachers, Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Education, 2013.
• Ş. Şengil Akar, I. Akar, “İlköğretim Okullarında Görev Yapmakta Olan Öğretmenlerin Üstün Yetenek Kavramı Hakkındaki Görüşleri”, Kastamonu Eğitim Derg., 20(2), 423–436, 2012.
• İ. Akar, M. Uluman, “Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencileri Doğru Aday Gösterme Durumları”, Üstun Yetenekliler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Derg., 1(3), 199–212, 2013.
• The Government of Western Australia Department of Education, Talented and Gifted Students eTAGS, 2010.
• C. Merrick, R. Targett, Gifted and talented education: Professional development package for teachers - Module 2, Australia: GERRIC Project-The University of New South Wales, 2004.
• G. A. Davis, S. B. Rimm, Education of the gifted and talented, 4th Edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1998.
• L. M. Terman, Genetic studies of genius. Vol. 1, Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1925.
• F. C. Worrell, B. A. Schaefer, “Reliability and validity of Learning Behaviors Scale (LBS) scores with academically talented students: A comparative perspective”, Gift. Child Q., 48(4), 287–308, 2004.
• H. E. Dağlıoğlu, İlkokul 2.-5. sınıflara devam eden çocuklar arasından üstün yetenekli olanların belirlenmesi, Yayımlanmış uzmanlık tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, 1995.
• G. H. Gear, “Accuracy of teacher judgment in identifying intellectually gifted children: A review of the literature”, Gift. Child Q., 20(4), 478–490, 1976.
• M. Gökdere, H. Ş. Ayvacı, “Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Üstün Yetenekli Çocuklar ve Özellikleri ile İlgili Bilgi Seviyelerinin Belirlenmesi”, Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Derg., 18, 17–26, 2004.
• R. D. Hoge, L. Cudmore, “The use of teacher-judgment measures in the identification of gifted pupils”, Teach. Teach. Educ., 2(2), 181–196, 1986.
• J. C. Jacobs, “Effectiveness of teacher and parent identification of gifted children as a function of school level”, Psychol. Sch., 8(2), 140–142, 1971.
• H. Neber, “Teacher identification of students for gifted programs: Nominations to a summer school for highly-gifted students” Psychol. Sci., 46(3), 348–362, 2004.
• J. J. Pedulla, P. W. Airasian, G. F. Madaus, “Do teacher ratings and standardized test results of students yield the same information?”, Am. Educ. Res. J., 17(3), 303–307, 1980.
• S. L. Hunsaker, V. S. Finley, and E. L. Frank, “An Analysis of Teacher Nominations and Student Performance in Gifted Programs”, Gift. Child Q., 41(2), 19–24, 1997.
• S. K. Johnsen, “Definitions, models, and characteristics of gifted students”, Identifying Gift. Stud. Pract. Guide, 1–22, 2004.
• A. S. Fishkin, A. S. Johnson, “Who is creative? Identifying children’s creative abilities”, Roeper Rev., 21(1), 40–46, 1998.
• G. R. Ryser, K. McConnell, Scales for identifying gifted students, Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, 2004.
• S. M. Reis, E. E. Sullivan, “Characteristics of gifted learners: Consistently varied; refreshingly diverse”, in Methods and Materials for Teaching the Gifted, 3rd ed., F. A. Karnes and S. M. Bean, Eds. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, 3–35, 2009.
• R. Milgram, E. Hong, “Talent loss in mathematics: Causes and solutions”, in Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students, R. Leikin, A. Berman, and B. Koichu, Eds. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, 149–163, 2009.
• N. McBride, “Early identification of the gifted and talented students: where do teachers stand?”, Gift. Educ. Int., 8(1), 19–22, 1992.
• H. E. Dağlıoğlu, S. Suveren, “The Role of Teacher and Family Opinions in Identifying Gifted Kindergarten Children and the Consistence of These Views with Children’s Actual Performance”, Educ. Sci. Theory Pract., 13(1), 444–453, 2013.
• T. Jarosewich, S. I. Pfeiffer, and J. Morris, “Identifying gifted students using teacher rating scales: A review of existing instruments”, J. Psychoeduc. Assess., 20(4), 322–336, 2002.
• J. S. Renzulli, S. M. Reis, The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for talent development, 3rd ed. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, 2014.
• F. C. Worrell, B. A. Schaefer, “Reliability and Validity of Learning Behaviors Scale (LBS) Scores with Academically Talented Students: A Comparative Perspective”, Gift. Child Q., 48(4), 287–308, 2004.
• K. L. Speirs Neumeister, C. M. Adams, R. L. Pierce, J. C. Cassady, F. A. Dixon, “Fourth-grade teachers’ perceptions of giftedness: Implications for identifying and serving diverse gifted students”, J. Educ. Gift., 30(4), 479–499, 2007.
• Y. Özsoy, M. Özyürek, S. Eripek, Özel eğitime muhtaç çocuklar: “özel eğitime giriş”, Ankara: Karatepe Yayınları, 1998.
• J. S. Renzulli, “Teacher nominations”, in Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent-Vol 2, B. Kerr, Ed. USA: Sage Publications, 878–880, 2009.
• G. D. Schack, A. J. Starko, “Identification of gifted students: An analysis of criteria preferred by preservice teachers, classroom teachers, and teachers of the gifted”, J. Educ. Gift., 13(4), 346–363, 1990.
• Internet: İ. Akar, Özel Gereksinimli Öğrenciler: Özel Yetenekliler, http://www.tuzyeksav.org.tr/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/akar-ibrahim-ozel-gereksinimli-ogrenciler-ustun-yetenekliler.-mart-2012.pdf, 10.10.2017.
• C. M. Callahan, E. M. Miller, “A child-responsive model of giftedness”, in Conceptions of Giftedness, 2nd ed., R. J. Sternberg and J. E. Davidson, Eds. UK: Cambridge University Press, 38–51, 2005.
• J. F. Feldhusen, “Identification and assessment of talented learners”, in Excellence in educating gifted and talented learners, J. Vantassel-Baska, Ed. Denver, CO: Love Publishing Company, 193–210, 1998.
• S. K. Johnsen, “Identification”, in Encyclopedia of Giftedness, Creativity, and Talent-Vol 2, B. Kerr, Ed. USA: Sage Publications, 439–443, 2009.
• Ö. Ersoy, N. Avcı, Üstün zekalı ve üstün yetenekliler, özel gereksinimi olan çocuklar ve eğitimleri, “Özel Eğitim” İstanbul: YAPA Yayın Pazarlama, 2001.
• A. Y. Baldwin, “Identification concerns and promises for gifted students of diverse populations”, Theory Pract., 44(2), 105–114, 2005.
• D. Y. Ford, “The underrepresentation of minority students in gifted education: Problems and promises in recruitment and retention”, J. Spec. Educ., 32(1), 4–14, 1998.
• C. J. Maker, “Identification of Gifted Minority Students: A National Problem, Needed Changes and a Promising Solution”, Gift. Child Q., 40(1), 41–50, 1996.
• J. A. Plucker, C. M. Callahan, E. M. Tomchin, “Wherefore Art Thou, Multiple Intelligences? Alternative Assessments for Identifying Talent in Ethnically Diverse and Low Income Students”, Gift. Child Q., 40(2), 81–91, 1996.
• J. S. Renzulli, S. M. Reis, The schoolwide enrichment model: A how-to guide for educational excellence, 2nd Edition. USA: Creative Learning Press, 1997.
• J. VanTassel-Baska, E. F. Brown, “Toward Best Practice: An Analysis of the Efficacy of Curriculum Models in Gifted Education”, Gift. Child Q., 51(4), 342–358, 2007.
• E. M. Singer, J. C. Houtz, S. Rosenfield, “Teacher-Identified Characteristics of Successful Gifted Students: A Delphi Study”, Educ. Res. Q., 15(3), 5–14, 1992.
• S. T. Mathew, “A review of the Gifted Evaluation Scale”, J. Sch. Psychol., 35(1), 101–104, 1997.
• S. B. McCarney, P. D. Anderson, Gifted Education Scale-Second Edition, technical manual, Columbia, MO: Hawthorne Educational Services, 1989.
• T. Oakland, B. A. Falkenberg, C. Oakland, “Assessment of Leadership in Children, Youth and Adults”, Gift. Child Q., 40(3), 138–146, 1996.
• G. R. Ryser, K. McConnell, Scales for identifying gifted students, Waco TX Prufrock Press Inc, 2004.
• S. N. Elliot, R. T. Busse, F. M. Gresham, “Behavior rating scales: Issues of use and development”, Sch. Psychol. Rev., 22(2), 313–321, 1993.
• K. Heller, J. F. Feldhusen, Eds., Identifying and Nurturing the Gifted: An International Perspective, Lewiston, NY: Hans Huber Publishers, 1986.
• G. Lindsay, D. Muijs, D. Hartas, E. Phillips, The National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth: Evaluation of The First Talent Search and Summer School, Coventry, UK: CEDAR, University of Warwick, 2002.
• A. Sıcak, “Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Aday Gösterme Sürecinde Öğretmen Gözlem Puanlarının TKT 7-11 ve WISC-R Puanlarını Yordayıcılık Gücünün İncelenmesi”, 1(1), 7–12, 2014.
• O. Kılıç, T. Bağrıaçık, Eds., Beni Anlayın Özel Yetenekli Çocuğum Var, Ankara: General Directorate of Special Education Guidance and Counseling Services, 2017.
• G. T. Betts, M. Neihart, “Profiles of the Gifted and Talented”, Gift. Child Q., 32(2), 248–253, 1988.
• E. Alpaydın, Introduction to Machine Learning, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2014.
• Internet: W. H. Wolberg, W. N. Street, O. L. Mangasarian, Breast Cancer Wisconsin (Diagnostic) Data Set, https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Breast+Cancer+Wisconsin+(Diagnostic), 06.07.2019.
• D. Dua, C. Graff, UCI Machine Learning Repository. University of California, Irvine, School of Information and Computer Sciences, 2017.
• M. Peker, O. Özkaraca, B. Kesi̇mal, “Enerji Tasarruflu Bina Tasarımı İçin Isıtma ve Soğutma Yüklerini Regresyon Tabanlı Makine Öğrenmesi Algoritmaları ile Modelleme”, Bilişim Teknol. Derg., 10(4), 2017.
• H. Erdal, T. Ş. Yaprakli, “Firma Başarısızlığı Tahminlemesi: Makine Öğrenmesine Dayalı Bir Uygulama”, Bilişim Teknol. Derg., 9(1), 2016.
• A. Özgür, H. Erdem, “Saldırı Tespit Sistemlerinde Kullanılan Kolay Erişilen Makine Öğrenme Algoritmalarının Karşılaştırılması”, Bilişim Teknol. Derg., 5(2), 2012.
• V. V. Nabiyev, Yapay Zekâ, 4th ed. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık San. ve Tic. A.Ş., 2012.
• S. Kotsiantis, “Educational Data Mining: A Case Study for Predicting Dropout-Prone Students”, Int J Knowl Eng Soft Data Paradigm, 1(2), 101–111, 2009.
• C. Márquez‐Vera, A. Cano, C. Romero, A. Y. M. Noaman, H. M. Fardoun, S. Ventura, “Early dropout prediction using data mining: a case study with high school students”, Expert Syst., 33(1), 107–124, 2016.
• C. Márquez-Vera, C. Romero, S. Ventura, “Predicting school failure using data mining”, 4th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, July 6-8, 2011.
• S. Botsios, D. Georgiou, N. Safouris, “Contributions to adaptive educational hypermedia systems via on-line learning style estimation”, J. Educ. Technol. Soc., 11(2), 2008.
• J. W. Creswell, J. D. Creswell, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches, 5th ed. Los Angeles: Sage publications, 2018.
• N. Karasar, Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi: Kavramlar-İlkeler-Teknikler, Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım, 2003.
• (Turkish Statistical Institute) TUIK, Seçilmiş Göstergelerle İstanbul 2013, Ankara: Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu Matbaası, 2014.
• Internet: (Ministry of National Education) MEB, Okullar ve Diğer Kurumlar, http://www.meb.gov.tr/baglantilar/okullar/index.php, 19.03.2019.
• S. N. Kaplan, “Layering differentiated curricula for the gifted and talented”, in Methods and materials for teaching the gifted, F. Karnes and S. Bean, Eds., 107–136, 2009.
• U. Sak, Üstün zekâlılar: Özellikleri tanılanmaları eğitimleri, Ankara: Maya Akademi Yayınevi, 2011.
• J. S. Renzulli, L. H. Smith, A. J. White, C. M. Callahan, R. K. Hartman, K. L. Westberg, Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students. Technical and administration manual, ERIC, 2002.
• J. E. Gilliam, B. O. Carpenter, J. R. Christensen, Gifted and Talented Evaluation Scales: A Norm-referenced Procedure for Identifying Gifted and Talented Students: Examiner’s Manual, Pro-Ed, 1996.
• K. A. Bollen, Structural Equations with Latent Variables, New York, NY: John Wiley, 1989.
• M. C. Pyryt, “Using discriminant analysis to identify gifted children”, J. Educ. Gift., 9(3), 233–238, 1986.
• R. K. Gable, M. B. Wolf, Instrument Development in the Affective Domain: Measuring Attitudes and Values in Corporate and School Settings, 2nd ed. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993.
• M. E. Balaban, E. Kartal, Veri Madenciliği ve Makine Öğrenmesi Temel Algoritmaları ve R Dili ile Uygulamaları, 2nd ed. Beyoğlu, İstanbul: Çağlayan Kitabevi, 2018.
• P. González-Aranda, E. Menasalvas, S. Millán, C. Ruiz, J. Segovia, “Towards a methodology for data mining project development: The importance of abstraction”, Data Min. Found. Pract., 165–178, 2008.
• C. Shearer, “The CRISP-DM model: the new blueprint for data mining”, J. Data Warehous., 5(4), 13–22, 2000.
• I. Guyon, A. Elisseeff, “An introduction to variable and feature selection”, J. Mach. Learn. Res., 3(Mar), 1157–1182, 2003.
• M. Kuhn, caret: Classification and Regression Training, 2016.
• M. Kuhn, The caret Package, 2016.
• P. Romanski, L. Kotthoff, FSelector: Selecting Attributes, 2016.
• Internet: K. Kleinmann, Example 8.39: calculating Cramer’s V, R-bloggers, https://www.r-bloggers.com/example-8-39-calculating-cramers-v/, 12.07.2017.
• Internet: J. Brownlee, A Tour of Machine Learning Algorithms, Machine Learning Mastery, https://machinelearningmastery.com/a-tour-of-machine-learning-algorithms/, 18.02.2019.
• R. Caruana, A. Niculescu-Mizil, “An empirical comparison of supervised learning algorithms”, in Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning, 161–168, 2006.
• Internet: S. Khan, Which algorithm fits best for categorical and continuous independent variables with categorical response in Machine Learning?, https://www.quora.com/Which-algorithm-fits-best-for-categorical-and-continuous-independent-variables-with-categorical-response-in-Machine-Learning, 18.02.2019.
• Internet: S. Khan, What are the advantages of using a naive Bayes for classification?, https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-advantages-of-using-a-naive-Bayes-for-classification, 18.02.2019.
• G. Biau, E. Scornet, “A random forest guided tour”, Test, 25(2), 197–227, 2016.
• H. Dalkılıç, F. Dalkılıç, “Karar Ağaçları Destekli Vadeli Mevduat Analizi”, Akademik Bilişim 2015, Eskişehir, Türkiye, 2015.
• B. Hssina, A. Merbouha, H. Ezzikouri, M. Erritali, “A comparative study of decision tree ID3 and C4. 5”, Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. Spec. Issue Adv. Veh. Ad Hoc Netw. Appl. 2014, 4(2), 13–19, 2014.
• L. Torgo, Data Mining with R: Learning with Case Studies, 1 edition. Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2010.
• N. Zumel, J. Mount, J. Porzak, Practical Data Science with R, 1st edition. Shelter Island, NY: Manning, 2014.
• Internet: cran.r-project.org, The Comprehensive R Archive Network, https://cran.r-project.org/, 25.03.2018.
• Internet: RStudio, RStudio – Open source and enterprise-ready professional software for R, https://www.rstudio.com/, 25.03.2018.
• D. Meyer, E. Dimitriadou, K. Hornik, A. Weingessel, F. Leisch, e1071: Misc Functions of the Department of Statistics, TU Wien., 2015.
• H. Wickham, ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York, 2009.
• A. Liaw, M. Wiener, “Classification and Regression by randomForest”, R News, 2(3), 18–22, 2002.
• S. Urbanek, rJava: Low-Level R to Java Interface. 2016.
• K. Hornik, C. Buchta, A. Zeileis, “Open-Source Machine Learning: R Meets Weka”, Comput. Stat., 24(2), 225–232, 2009.
• I. H. Witten, E. Frank, Data Mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques, 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, 2005.
• Internet: A. A. Dragulescu, xlsx: Read, write, format Excel 2007 and Excel 97/2000/XP/2003 files, http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=xlsx, 28.05.2015.
• H. Brink, J. W. Richards, M. Fetherolf, Real-world machine learning. Shelter Island, NY: Manning Publications Co., 2017.
• S. Ali, K. A. Smith, “On learning algorithm selection for classification”, Appl. Soft Comput., 6(2), 119–138, 2006.
• E. Kartal, Z. Özen, “Dengesiz Veri Setlerinde Sınıflandırma”, in Mühendislikte Yapay Zekâ ve Uygulamaları, 1st ed., O. Torkul, S. Gülseçen, Y. Uyaroğlu, G. Çağıl, and M. K. Uçar, Eds. Sakarya: Sakarya Üniversitesi Kütüphanesi Yayınevi, 109–131, 2017.
• G. A. Davis, D. Siegle, S. B. Rimm, Education of the Gifted and Talented, 7th ed. New York: Pearson, 2017.
• M. Neihart, G. Betts, “Revised profiles of the gifted and talented”, Recuperado Talent Stimuleren Httptalentstimuleren Nl, 2010.
• D. B. McCoach, D. Siegle, “Factors That Differentiate Underachieving Gifted Students from High-Achieving Gifted Students”, Gift. Child Q., 47(2), 144–154, 2003.
• J. B. Hansen, J. F. Feldhusen, “Comparison of Trained and Untrained Teachers of Gifted Students”, Gift. Child Q., 38(3), 115–121, 1994.
• J. Plucker, A. Rinn, M. Makel, Eds., From giftedness to gifted education: Reflecting theory in practice, Waco, TX: Prufrock Press, 2017.
• A. Acharya, D. Sinha, “Application of feature selection methods in educational data mining”, Int. J. Comput. Appl., 103(2), 34–38, 2014.
• M. Ramaswami, R. Bhaskaran, “A CHAID based performance prediction model in educational data mining”, ArXiv Prepr. ArXiv10021144, 2010.
• N. T. Nghe, P. Janecek, P. Haddawy, “A comparative analysis of techniques for predicting academic performance”, Oct. 2007, T2G-7-T2G-12.
• Z. Kovacic, “Early prediction of student success: Mining students’ enrolment data”, Proceedings of Informing Science & IT Education Conference (InSITE), 2010.