•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This study examines student performance across three instructional intervention strategies in an Introduction to Information Technology subject at a Malaysian private university in Perak. The dataset was obtained from the university system and involved a seven-week short-semester teaching period. A total of 308 diploma students were included and divided into three existing class groups: traditional lecture-based learning (n = 103), multimedia-assisted learning (n = 100), and blended learning (n = 105). Each group was exposed to a different instructional approach delivered by a different lecturer. Student performance was assessed through quizzes, assignments, midterm examination, and final examination. The study analyzed student performance using descriptive statistics, boxplot visualizations and formal statistical tests. The findings showed that the multimedia-assisted and blended learning groups generally performed better than the traditional lecture-based group in selected assessment components, particularly midterm examinations and assignments. However, no significant differences were found for quiz and final examination scores, indicating that performance differences varied according to assessment component. The correlation analysis showed that quiz and midterm scores had the strongest positive relationship among the assessment components (r = 0.474), while the assignment score had a very weak relationship with final examination score (r = 0.058). Blended learning showed weak positive correlations with all assessment components, while multimedia-assisted learning showed weak positive correlations with midterm and assignment scores. This is due to the limited sample size. The traditional lecture-based group showed negative correlations with midterm and assignment scores. In addition, this study applied regression-based learning analytics models to explore whether continuous assessment scores and instructional group information could predict students’ final examination performance. Eight regression techniques were tested and evaluated using mean squared error, mean absolute error, root mean squared error, and R² score. Based on the latest experimental results, KNN Regression produced the most favorable performance in terms of MSE (45.8526), RMSE (6.7715), and R² score (0.6467). These findings suggest that model performance depends on the data pattern, assessment structure, and prediction target. Therefore, the results should not be generalized to other courses or institutions without further validation. Semi-structured interviews with lecturers were also conducted to provide contextual insights into the implementation of the instructional interventions. Overall, the findings suggest that multimedia-assisted and blended learning approaches were associated with better performance in selected continuous assessment components. However, the findings should be interpreted cautiously since there are some limitations in collecting the dataset.

References

[1] Wu S, Radin Firdaus RB, Wang Y, Kamsi NS. Mapping higher education research in Malaysia and Singapore (2014—2024): a bibliometric analysis through the research—policy—practice lens, 16; 2025. SAGE Open SAGE Publications Inc.

[2] Ahmed E. Student Performance Prediction Using Machine Learning Algorithms. Appl Comput Intell Soft Comput 2024;2024(1):1—35. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/4067721.

[3] Rajput S, Ramesh S. Student Performance Analysis based on Machine Learning Algorithms. In: 2023 3rd international conference on intelligent technologies (CONIT); 2023. p. 1—4. IEEE.

[4] Khan A, Ghosh SK. Educ Inf Technol (Dordr). 2021;26(1): 205—40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10230-3.

[5] Sonnleitner B, Madou T, Deceuninck M, Theodosiou F, Sagaert YR. Comput Educ Artif Intell 2025;8. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100369. Elsevier B.V.

[6] Adams T, Koster B, Den Brok P. The effects of an intervention in student teachers’ classroom management learning processes. Pedagogische Studien. Vereniging voor Onderwijsresearch (VOR) 2024;101(1):60—84. https://doi.org/10.59302/ps. v101i1.18784.

[7] P Machera R. Teaching Intervention Strategies that Enhance Learning in Higher Education. Univers J Educ Res 2017;5(5):733—43. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2017.050505. Horizon Research Publishing Co., Ltd.

[8] Delshad MH, Ahmady S. The impact of educational intervention: a comparison of traditional teaching methods and model-based approaches. Health Sci Monitor. Apex Pub 2024;3(3):203—15. https://doi.org/10.61186/hsm.3.3.203.

[9] Sonnleitner B, Madou T, Deceuninck M, Theodosiou F, Sagaert YR. Evaluation of early student performance prediction given concept drift. Comput Educ Artif Intell 2025;8(July 2024):100369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai .2025.100369. Elsevier Ltd.

[10] Moslemzadeh M, Farzin S, Karami H, Ahmadianfar I. Introducing improved atom search optimization (IASO) algorithm: Application to optimal operation of multi-reservoir systems. Phys Chem Earth 2023;131(October):1—9. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2023.103415.

[11] Nabil A, Seyam M, Abou-Elfetouh A. Prediction of Students’ Academic Performance Based on Courses’ Grades Using Deep Neural Networks. IEEE Access. IEEE 2021;9:140731—46. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3119596.

[12] Priya S, Ankit T, Divyansh D. Student performance prediction using machine learning. Adv Parallel Computing 2021;39:167—74. https://doi.org/10.3233/APC210137.

[13] Hidayatulloh W, Mahardika F, Junaedi DI. Explainable Artificial Intelligence-Based Model for Student Academic Performance Prediction. J Inform Syst Explor Resh 2026;4(1): 31—40. https://doi.org/10.52465/joiser.v4i1.624.

[14] Paul R, Hussain S, Devi Kannan K, Mondal BK, Baruah AK, Gaftandzhieva S. Interpreting the Machine Learning Approaches to Predict CGPA of the University Students. TEM J Assoc Inform Com Technol Edu Sci (UIKTEN) 2025;3438. https://doi.org/10.18421/tem144-50.

[15] Paul R, Mohamed A, Canatalay P, Kukkar A, Hussain S, Baruah A, et al. Optimization vs Boosting: Comparison of Strategies on Educational Datasets to Explore Low-performing at-risk and Dropout Students. Math Inform 2025;68(6): 554—77. https://doi.org/10.53656/math2025-6-4-obc.

[16] Jawthari M, Stoffova V. Predicting students’ academic performance using a modified kNN algorithm. Pollack Period 2021;16(3):20—6. https://doi.org/10.1556/606.2021. 00374.

[17] Al-Shehri H, Al-Qarni A, Al-Saati L, Batoaq A, Badukhen H, Alrashed S, et al. Student performance prediction using Support Vector Machine and K-Nearest Neighbor. Canadian conference on electrical and computer engineering. 2017. p. 17—20. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCECE.2017.7946847.

[18] Mashagba E, Al-Saqqar F, Al-Shatnawi A. Using Gradient Boosting Algorithms in Predicting Student Academic Performance. 2nd international conference on business analytics for technology and security, ICBATS 2023. IEEE; 2023. p. 1—7. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICBATS57792.2023.10111325.

[19] Alnoman A. Regression-based Student Performance Prediction Using the Grades of English, Math, and Programming Courses. In: 2024 IEEE international conference on technology management, operations and decisions, ICTMOD 2024. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.; 2024.

[20] Dagdagui R T. Predicting Students’ Academic Performance Using Regression Analysis. Am J Educ Res. Sci Edu Pub Co., Ltd. 2022;10(11):640—6. https://doi.org/10.12691/education10-11-2.

[21] Ying D, Ma J. Student Performance Prediction with Regression Approach and Data Generation. Appl Sci 2024; 14(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/app14031148.

[22] Grace Funmilayo O, IbukunT A. Student’S Performance Prediction Using Multiple Linear Regression and Decision Tree. Int J Adv Res Comput Eng Technol (IJARCET) 2019;8(7).

[23] Yamasari Y, Rochmawati N, Putra RE, Qoiriah A, Asmunin Yustanti W. Predicting the Students Performance using Regularization-based Linear Regression. Proceedings - 4Th international conference on vocational education and electrical engineering: strengthening engagement with communities through artificial intelligence application in education, electrical engineering and information technology, ICVEE 202. IEEE; 2021. p. 1—5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ ICVEE54186.2021.9649704.

[24] Students SSP. Performance prediction and classification using ridge regression algorithm. 2023. p. 1006—14. https:// doi.org/10.59544/wkay2529/ngcesi23p112.

[25] Nachouki M, Mohamed EA, Mehdi R, Abou Naaj M. Student course grade prediction using the random forest algorithm: Analysis of predictors’ importance. Trends Neurosci Educ 2023;33:100214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine. 2023.100214. Elsevier GmbH.

[26] Jadhav Prathmesh, Toshniwal Abhishek, Golawar Yash, Khomhane Pratik. Student Performance Prediction using Support Vector Machine. Int J Adv Res Sci Commun Technol 2022;(May:380—5. https://doi.org/10.48175/ijarsct-3939.

[27] Alamri LH, Almuslim RS, Alotibi MS, Alkadi DK, Ullah Khan I, Aslam N. Predicting Student Academic Performance using Support Vector Machine and Random Forest. ACM Int Conference Proceed Series 2020:100—7. https://doi. org/10.1145/3446590.3446607. PartF16898.

[28] Oz € E, Bulut O, Cellat ZF, Yürekli H. Stacking: An ensemble learning approach to predict student performance in PISA 2022. Educ Inf Technol (Dordr). Springer 2025;30(6):7753—79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13110-2.

Download

Share

COinS