Comparison of Artificial Neural Networks and Logistic Regression Analysis in PISA Science Literacy Success Prediction

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 2, 99 - 111, 30.12.2020

Ali Bozak , Eren Can Aybek

https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.693081

Cited By: 1

Abstract

The present study aims to determine which analysis technique-Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) or Logistic Regression (LR) Analysis-is better at predicting the science literacy success of the 15-year Turkish students who participated in PISA research carried out in 2015 by using learning time spent on science, test anxiety, environmental awareness, environmental optimism, epistemological beliefs, inquiry-based science teaching and learning practices, instrumental motivation, and disciplinary climate in science classes as the predictor variables. For this purpose, the data from 5895 students who participated in the PISA 2015 test were analyzed. Models were developed using LR and ANNs, and the results were compared. As a result, although the classification performance of artificial neural network is significantly better compared to LR, it is understood that practical significance is low due to the intersection of AUC confidence intervals.

Keywords

Artificial Neural Networks, Logistic Regression, PISA, Science Literacy

References

• Adodo, S. O. (2013). Effect of mind-mapping as a self-regulated learning strategy on students’ achievement in basic science and technology. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 4(6), 163-172.
• Aljaser, A. M. (2017). The effectiveness of electronic mind maps in developing academic achievement and the attitude towards learning English among primary school students. International Education Studies, 10(12), 80-95.
• Balım, A. G. (2013). The effect of mind-mapping applications on upper primary students’ success and inquiry-learning skills in science and environment education. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 22(4), 337-352.
• Bessick, S. C. (2008). Improved critical thinking skills as a result of direct instruction and their relationship to academic achievement. Doctoral dissertation. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
• Budd, J. W. (2004). Mind maps as classroom exercises. The Journal of Economic Education, 35(1), 35-46.
• Butchart, S., Forster, D., Gold, I., Bigelow, J., Korb, K., Oppy, G., & Serrenti, A. (2009). Improving critical thinking using web based argument mapping exercises with automated feedback. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 268-291.
• Bütüner, S. Ö., & Gür, H. (2008). Teaching Of Angles and Triangles by Using Vee Diagrams and Mind Maps. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(1), 1-18.
• Buzan T. (2006). The Buzan study skills handbook: The shortcut to success in your studies with mind mapping, speed reading and winning memory techniques. Harlow: BBC Active.
• Buzan, T. (1989). Use both sides of your brain: New mind-mapping techniques to help you raise all levels of your ıntelligence and creativity based on the latest discoveries about the human brain. Penguin Books USA Incorporated.
• Buzan, T. & Buzan, B. (2016). The mind map book: Unlock your creativity, boost your memory, change your life. (Trans: Tercanlı, G.) England: Pearson Publishing.
• Carrington, M., Chen, R., Davies, M., Kaur, J., & Neville, B. (2011). The effectiveness of a single intervention of computer‐aided argument mapping in a marketing and a financial accounting subject. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(3), 387-403.
• Davies, M. (2010). Concept mapping, mind mapping and argument mapping: what are the differences and do they matter? Higher education, 62(3), 279-301.
• Davies, M. (2011). Computer-Aided Argument Mapping: An Educational Revolution. New Media, New Literacies, And New Forms of Learning; Institute Of Education. London, 1-7.
• Davies, M. (2012). Computer-Aided Mapping and the Teaching of Critical Thinking: Part I. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 27(2), 15-30.
• Davies, M., Barnett, A., & van Gelder, T. (2019). Using computer-assisted argument mapping to teach reasoning to students. In Studies in critical thinking, (chapter: 10) Windsor Studies in Argumentation publisher.
• Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2011). The promotion of critical thinking skills through argument mapping. In Critical thinking. (Eds: Christopher P. Horvath and James M. Forte). Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
• Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2012). An evaluation of argument mapping as a method of enhancing critical thinking performance in e-learning environments. Metacognition and Learning, 7(3), 219-244.
• Eftekhari, M., Sotoudehnama, E., & Marandi, S. S. (2016). Computer-aided argument mapping in an EFL setting: does technology precede traditional paper and pencil approach in developing critical thinking?. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(2), 339-357.
• Evrekli, E., & Balim, A. G. (2010). The effect of use of mind mapping and concept cartoons in science and technology education on students’ academic achıevements and inquiry learning skill perceptions The Western Anatolia Journal of Educational Sciences, 1(2), 76-98.
• Evrekli, E., Balim, A. G., & İnel, D. (2009). Mind mapping applications in special teaching methods courses for science teacher candidates and teacher candidates’ opinions concerning the applications. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 2274-2279.
• Fu, Q. K., Lin, C. J., Hwang, G. J., & Zhang, L. (2019). Impacts of a mind mapping-based contextual gaming approach on EFL students’ writing performance, learning perceptions and generative uses in an English course. Computers & Education, 137, 59-77.
• Gredler, M. E. (1997). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
• Hay, D., B. (2007). Using concept mapping to measure deep, surface and non-learning outcomes. Studies in Higher Education 32(1), 39–57.
• Hay, D., Kinchin, I., & Lygo‐Baker, S. (2008). Making learning visible: the role of concept mapping in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 295-311.
• Israel, C., Zipp, G. P., D'Abundo, M., & Deluca, D. (2020). Mind mapping to enhance critical thinking skills in physician assistant education: a randomized controlled study. Journal of Allied Health, 49(2), 135-140.
• Jeong, A. C. (2020). Developing computer-aided diagramming tools to mine, model and support students’ reasoning processes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 1-17. (in press)
• Jones, B. D., Ruff, C., Snyder, J. D., Petrich, B., & Koonce, C. (2012). The effects of mind mapping activities on students' motivation. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(1), 1-23.
• Koznov, D., & Pliskin, M. (2008, October). Computer-supported collaborative learning with mind-maps. In International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation (pp. 478-489). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
• Kunsch, D. W., Schnarr, K., & van Tyle, R. (2014). The use of argument mapping to enhance critical thinking skills in business education. Journal of Education for Business, 89(8), 403-410.
• Lin, L., Shadiev, R., Hwang, W. Y., & Shen, S. (2020). From knowledge and skills to digital works: an application of design thinking in the ınformation technology course. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 100646.
• Luo, J. (2019). Teaching mode of thinking development learning based on mind mapping in the course of health fitness education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 14(08), 192-205.
• Mento, A. J., Martinelli, P., & Jones, R. M. (1999). Mind mapping in executive education: applications and outcomes. Journal of Management Development, 18(4), 390-416.
• Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413-448.
• Öksöz, Y. & Coşkun, K. (2012). Impact of the school experience courses on special educational needs teachers’ sense of self-efficacy. Journal of Kirsehir Education Faculty, 13(2), 131-155.
• Rider, Y., & Thomason, N. (2014). Cognitive and pedagogical benefits of argument mapping: LAMP guides the way to better thinking. In Knowledge cartography (pp. 113-134).Springer, London.
• Shroff, R. H., Deneen, C. C., & Ng, E. M. W. (2011). Analysis of the technology acceptance model in examining students' behavioural intention to use an e-portfolio system. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(4), 600-618.
• Siah, C. J., Lim, F. P., Lim, A. E., Lau, S. T., & Tam, W. (2019). Efficacy of team-based learning in knowledge integration and attitudes among year-one nursing students: A pre-and post-test study. Collegian Journal of the Royal College of Nursing Australia, 26(5), 556-561.
• Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52(2), 302-312.
• Tergan, S.-O. (2006). Individual knowledge and information management with concept maps in web-based learning. In H. Mandl& H. F. Friedrich (Eds.), Handbuch Lernstrategien [Handbook learning strategies] (pp. 307–324). Göttingen, DE: Hogrefe.
• van Gelder, T. J. (2003). Enhancing deliberation through computer supported argument mapping. In P. Kirschner, S. Buckingham Shum, & C. Carr (Eds.), Visualizing argumentation: Software tools for collaborative and educational sense-making (pp. 97–115). London: Springer.
• van Gelder, T. J. (2015). Using argument mapping to improve critical thinking skills. In M. Davies & R. Barnett (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education (pp.183-192). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
• van Gelder, T., Bissett, M., & Cumming, G. (2004). Enhancing expertise in informal reasoning. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 142–152.
• van Gelder, T.J., & Rizzo, A. (2001). Reason! Able across curriculum, in Is it an Odyssey in Learning? Proceedings of the 2001 Conference of ICT in Education, Victoria, Australia.
• Wixom, B. H., & Todd, P. A. (2005). A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Information systems research, 16(1), 85-102.
• Wu, H. Z., & Wu, Q. T. (2020). Impact of mind mapping on the critical thinking ability of clinical nursing students and teaching application. Journal of International Medical Research, 48(3), 1-8
• Yamak, H., Bulut, N., & Dündar, S. (2014). The impact of stem activities on 5th grade students’ scientific process skills and their attitudes towards science Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 34(2), 249-265.
• Zumbach, J. (2009). The role of graphical and text based argumentation tools in hypermedia learning. Computers in Human Behaviour, 25(4), 811-817.