Text analysis in education: a review of selected software packages with an application for analysing students’ conceptual understanding

ABSTRACT Using text analysis, computers can find patterns to determine and extract useful information from a set of text. Exploiting the capabilities of text analysis software can efficiently provide educators with the ability to analyse students’ answers and make better judgement on their performance. Such ability would otherwise be impossible to practically gain, especially for large classes. Because of the availability of a wide range of text analysis software, with varied features, an important question to ask is which software to use, that best suits a certain application, and users’ educational technology skills. This paper evaluates seven selected software packages which can be used for textual analysis. The graphical abstract, Figure 1, shows the outputs of one of the software packages (Leximancer), using the text from this paper as input. The data set and results presented use responses from a university-level test in an electrical engineering topic, which are included in this paper. The test was designed to assess students’ conceptual understanding. Students were asked to provide an explanatory text justifying their selection of a multiple-choice option. The principles, ideas and software evaluation criteria discussed, although applied to our dataset, can be extended to many other areas and fields. Graphical Abstract

[1]  Stephan Dahl,et al.  Turnitin[R]: The Student Perspective on Using Plagiarism Detection Software. , 2007 .

[2]  Dhammika Jayalath,et al.  Insights Into Students' Conceptual Understanding Using Textual Analysis: A Case Study in Signal Processing , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Education.

[3]  Sungsoo Hwang,et al.  Utilizing Qualitative Data Analysis Software , 2008 .

[4]  Jian Pei,et al.  Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques, 3rd edition , 2006 .

[5]  Ahmed Abbasi,et al.  Benchmarking Twitter Sentiment Analysis Tools , 2014, LREC.

[6]  Petra Perner,et al.  Data Mining - Concepts and Techniques , 2002, Künstliche Intell..

[7]  Pat Langley,et al.  Elements of Machine Learning , 1995 .

[8]  M. McHugh Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic , 2012, Biochemia medica.

[9]  Wageeh Boles,et al.  A three-year longitudinal textual analysis investigation of students’ conceptual understanding: Lessons learnt and implications for teaching , 2016 .

[10]  Roel Popping,et al.  Human or Machine Coding of Open-ended Questions , 2012 .

[11]  Marilia Sá Carvalho,et al.  Why open source? , 2015, Cadernos de saude publica.

[12]  Andrew E. Smith,et al.  Evaluation of unsupervised semantic mapping of natural language with Leximancer concept mapping , 2006, Behavior research methods.

[13]  Andrea Bonaccorsi,et al.  Why Open Source Software Can Succeed , 2003 .

[14]  Denise Whitelock,et al.  OpenEssayist: an automated feedback system that supports university students as they write summative essays , 2013 .

[15]  Mark Urban-Lurain,et al.  Automated Text Analysis Facilitates Using Written Formative Assessments for Just-in-Time Teaching in Large Enrollment Courses , 2013 .

[16]  Esther L. Zirbel,et al.  Teaching to Promote Deep Understanding and Instigate Conceptual Change , 2006 .

[17]  K. Tatsuoka,et al.  Open-Ended Versus Multiple-Choice Response Formats—It Does Make a Difference for Diagnostic Purposes , 1987 .

[18]  Brian H. Hahn,et al.  Essential Matlab For Engineers And Scientists , 2008 .

[19]  Robert Dale NLP meets the cloud , 2015, Nat. Lang. Eng..