Better Data Beat Big Data

Generalizability of models of student learning is a highly desirable feature. As new students interact with educational systems, highly predictive models, tuned to increasing amounts of data from previous learners, presumably allow such systems to provide a more individualized, optimal learning path, give better feedback, and provide a more effective learning experience. However, any large student/user population will be heterogeneous and likely consist of discernable sub-populations for which specific models of learning may be appropriate. Student subpopulations may differ with respect to cognitive factors, the level and quality of instruction, and many other environmental and noncognitive factors. The era of both “big data” and widely deployed educational software, including Carnegie Learning’s Cognitive Tutor (CLCT) intelligent tutoring system, presents opportunities to analyze increasingly large volumes of data collected during learners’ interactions with educational systems. These data cover a broad spectrum of learners, allowing researchers to investigate the structure of an increasingly representative student population. In this work, we investigate discovering student sub-populations from “big data.” Using a year’s worth of data from CLCT, we test the hypothesis that commonly used stratifications of student subpopulations (e.g., school location, socio-demographic factors) offer ways to meaningfully partition learners. We discover that, rather than finding distinct subpopulations that should be treated differently, a particular sub-population of learners provides especially “high quality” data and that models learned from this sub-population outperform all other models even when predicting student learning for the sub-population on which other models were trained. In this way, “better data beat big data.”