Papers › Machine Learning Classifiers Do Not Improve the Prediction of Academic Risk: Evidence...
Machine Learning Classifiers Do Not Improve the Prediction of Academic Risk: Evidence from Australia
Sarah Cornell-Farrow, Robert Garrard
Machine learning methods tend to outperform traditional statistical models at prediction. In the prediction of academic achievement, ML models have not shown substantial improvement over logistic regression. So far, these results have almost entirely focused on college achievement, due to the availability of administrative datasets, and have contained relatively small sample sizes by ML standards. In this article we apply popular machine learning models to a large dataset (n=1.2 million) containing primary and middle school performance on a standardized test given annually to Australian students. We show that machine learning models do not outperform logistic regression for detecting students who will perform in the `below standard' band of achievement upon sitting their next test, even in a large-n setting.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections