Open university learning analytics dataset

Learning analytics focuses on the collection and analysis of learner’s data to improve their
learning experience by providing informed guidance and to optimize learning materials to
support the research in this area we have developed a dataset.
By analysing the open university learning data, there are 7 datasets relating to eachother.

 Assessments.csv

 Courses.csv

 StudentAssessment.csv

 StudentInfo.csv

 StudentRegistration.csv

 StudentVle.csv

 Vle.csv

Graph depicts the number of students in each module. It was observed that GGG has a least
number of students, and DDD module has been high opted by the students.
First graph in the above dashboard discovered that out of the entire data given, the number
of post-graduation students are least. “A level or equivalent” has maximum number of
students. Hence, it is to be considered that the concentration has to be given to acquire
post-graduation students.
Second graph was analyzed in which it was interpreted that the performance of students in
module BBB was the best compared to all other modules.
9.71% of the students were observed to have disability which depicts that the modules have
been designed well were in even students with disabilities have opted to choose the course.
(Graph 3)

Credits for 2014J has been noticed the highest. Though the percentage of credits is 22.74%
for 2014B, the number of attempts has been too much compared to 2014J in graph 4.
Out of 32,593 students, 31.16% of students have withdrawn the result, which is a very bad
sign of it. Therefore, it is necessary to look into the cause of it. Even out of other students
except those who have withdrawn, the fail percentage in very high up to 21.64%.

DDD module has a constant weight between the year 2013 and 2014. Module AAA has a
very least weight where the concentration has to been given.
Number of students opted “dual plane” are too less and the number of students opted
resource material is too high.
Taking the average score between February and August for each year, the forecasting
predicted that the average score would be 74.95 for the months between August to April.
(Graph 1)
Module presentation length of 234 is seen to have least total scores. Hence, this module has
to be altered so that students can score better.
Number students in 2014B is observed to have only 17.43% of students enrolled as per the
graph 2.
The proportion of total code per presentation is 2% for the module AAA. Module FFF seems
to be good enough where maximum number of students have opted it.
All modules are seen to have good credits except for modules CCC, and AAA. All other
modules have a very good credit of 100%.