Keywords 
Data Mining, Classification, Prediction, Naive Bayes algorithm (NB), Student Evaluation 
INTRODUCTION 
Many leading higher education and Technical Education institutions aim is to contribute to the improvement of
quality of higher education, the success of creation of human capital is the subject of a continuous analysis[1].
Therefore, the prediction of students' success is essential for higher education and Technical education institutions,
because the quality of teaching process is the ability to meet students' needs. In this sense important data and
information are gathered on a regular basis, and they are considered at the appropriate authorities, and standards in
order to maintain the quality are set. All participants in the educational process could benefit by applying data mining
on the data from the higher education system decibel in figure1. Computational data process from different
Perspectives represents from data mining with the goal of extracting implicit and interesting samples , trends and
information from the data, it can greatly help every participant in the educational process in order to improve the
understanding of the teaching process, and it centres on discovering, detecting and explaining educational
phenomenon’s [1]. 
Most Researchers suggests academic performance [3, 4] using student outcome as a good basis to assess applicants’
qualifications. A performance prediction model can be built by applying data mining to available admission and
graduation grade point average data. Fortunately, AIT has a large database of information on past and current
applicants. [2]. Decision support systems have been built to help advisors instruct students in choosing suitable courses
and appropriate study plans [5, 6]. Previous work on student performance prediction used logistic regression to
examine the impact of various factors on student performance [5]. Bekele and Menzel [7] used Bayesian networks to
predict mathematics performance of high school students. Their model categorized students into three categories:
below satisfactory, satisfactory, and above satisfactory. The work reported in the present paper differs from theirs in the
highly international nature of the applicant pool and the more fine grained prediction [2]. 
In this paper we present an approach using Bayesian networks to predict graduating cumulative Grade Point
Average based on applicant data collected from the surveys conducted during the summer semester at the University of
Tuzla, the Faculty of Economics, academic year 20102011, among first year students and the data taken during the
enrolment. Bayesian prediction model can provide valuable information to departmental faculty members in making
decisions. They may be more comfortable with the predictive results if the system can show them the past student most
similar to the applicant being considered. In this paper different techniques of data mining suitable for classification
have been compared: Bayesian classifier, neural networks and decision trees. Neural networks have in many areas
shown success in solving problems of prediction, approximation, function, classification and pattern recognition. Their
accuracy was compared with decision trees and with the Bayesian classifier. The results indicate that the Naïve Bayes
classifier outperforms in prediction decision tree and neural network methods. It also indicated that a good classifier
model has to be both accurate and comprehensible for professors. 
DATA DESCRIPTION 
The data for the model were collected through a questionnaire survey conducted during the summer semester at the
Faculty of Economics in Tuzla, academic year 20102011, among the first year students. After eliminating incomplete
data, the sample comprised 257 students who were at the time of researches present at the practice classes. The model
of students' success was created, where success as the output variable is measured with the success in the course
''Business Informatics’’ [1]. 
As input to the model 12 variables are used, whose names and coding is shown in Table1. Distribution of the final
students' grades in the course ''Business Informatics'' is shown in Figure 2. It is evident that the prediction error rate will
be much higher in the first case due to different distribution of grades through classes; hence the advantage is given to
the second case of this study. 
DATA MINING APPROACH 
Data mining is a computational method of processing data which is successfully applied in many areas that aim to
obtain useful knowledge from the data [9]. The goal of the analysis is the categorization of data by class, then that is the
new information on classes to which data belongs. In order to do this, algorithms are divided into two basic groups: 
Unsupervised algorithms and 
Supervised algorithms. 
The mining is ''unsupervised'' or ''undirected'', when the output conditions are not explicitly represented in the data
set: the task of unsupervised algorithm is to discover automatically inherent patterns in the data without the prior
information about which class the data could belong, and it does not involve any supervision [11]. 
Supervised algorithms are those which use data with in advance familiar class to which data belong for building
models, and then on the basis of the constructed model predict the class to which unknown data will belong. Methods
of data classification represent a process of learning a function that maps the data into one of several predefined classes.
To every classification algorithm, that is based on inductive learning, input data set is given, that consists of vectors of
attribute values and their corresponding class. The goal of a classification technique is to build a model which makes it
possible to classify future data points based on a set of specific characteristics in an automated way[1]. Such systems
take a collection of cases as input, each belonging to one of a small number of classes and described by its values for a
fixed set of attributes. As output they take a classifier that can accurately predict the class to which a new case belongs. The most common methods of classifications are: decision trees, induction rules or classification rules, probabilistic or
Bayesian networks, neural networks and hybrid procedures. 
NAIVE BAYES ALGORITHM 
A Bayesian network [8] is a graphical representation of a probability distribution. It is a directed acyclic graph in
which nodes represent random variables and links represent probabilistic influences between the variables. Probabilistic
dependence and independence are expressed by the presence or lack of paths between nodes in the graph[2]. The fact
that probabilistic dependence is encoded in the network topology in this way permits probability distributions over
large numbers of random variables to be compactly represented and permits calculations to be performed efficiently.
Due to the inherent uncertainty of the performance prediction problem, we chose to use Bayesian networks for the
modeling task. Using a probabilistic model has the advantage that it can later become a component of a higher level
optimization model. 
Naive Bayes algorithm (NB) is a simple method for classification based on the theory of probability, i.e. the
Bayesian theorem [10]. It is called naïve because it simplifies problems relying on two important assumptions: it
assumes that the prognostic attributes are conditionally independent with familiar classification, and it supposes that
there are no hidden attributes. that could affect the process of prediction. This classifier represents the promising
approach to the probabilistic discovery of knowledge, and it provides a very efficient algorithm for data classification. 
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 
We have performed the experiments on WEKA software package ,that was developed at the University of
Waikato in New Zealand. This package has been implemented in the software language Java and today stands out as
probably the most competent and comprehensive package with algorithms of machinery learning in academic and
nonprofit world (Machine Learning Group at University of Waikato, 2011). 
To get a better insight into the importance of the input variables, it is customary to analyze the impact of input
variables during students' prediction success. The impact of certain input variable of the model on the output variable
has been analyzed. Tests were conducted using four tests for the assessment of input variables: Chisquare test, One Rtest,
Info Gain test and Gain Ratio test. The results of each test were monitored using the following metrics: Attribute
(name of the attribute), Merit (measure of goodness), Merit dev (deviation, i.e. measure of goodness deviation), Rank
(average position occupied by attribute), Rank and dev (deviation, deviation takes attribute's position). The results
obtained with these values are shown in Table 4. 
In this aggregate table "Merit" columns are not applicable, because the algorithms use mutually incompatible
metrics. The aim of this analysis is to determine the importance of each attribute individually. Table 4. shows that
attribute PO (GPA) impacts output the most, and that it showed the best performances in all of the four tests. Then
these attributes follow: URK (entrance exam), MAT (study material), VRI (average weekly hours devoted to studying).
The following attributes had the smallest output impact: BCD (number of household members), UAS (distance of
residence from the faculty) and S (sex). 
We have carried out some experiments in order to evaluate the performance and usefulness of NB classification
algorithms for predicting students’ success. The results of the experiments are summarized in Table 5, 6, 7 and 8. The
performances of the NB models are evaluated based on the three criteria: the prediction accuracy, learning time and
error rate, which are illustrated in Figures 4, 5, and 6. 
From the results, Naïve Bayes has better prediction. NB classifiers used for experiment, the accuracy rate of NB
algorithm is the Highest. The Naïve Bayes and decision tree classifier learn more rapidly in the time to build a model
for the given dataset. 
The performance of the learning techniques is highly dependent on the nature of the training data. Confusion
matrices are very useful for evaluating classifiers. The columns represent the predictions, and the rows represent the
actual class. To evaluate the robustness of classifier, the usual methodology is to perform cross validation on the
classifier. In general, cross validation has been proved to be statistically good enough in evaluating the performance of
the classifier. Good results correspond to large numbers down the main diagonal and small, ideally zero, offdiagonal
elements. 
In educational problem, it is also very important for the classification model obtained to be user friendly, so that
teachers can make decisions to improve student learning. Nonetheless, some models are more interpretable than others
[13]. Decision trees are considered easily understood models because a reasoning process can be given for each
conclusion. Knowledge models under this paradigm can be directly transformed into a set of IFTHEN rules that are
one of the most popular forms of knowledge representation, due to their simplicity and comprehensibility which
professor can easy understand and interpret (Figure 2)[1]. 
The model (Figure 2) is easy to understood. This model can give faculty interesting information about student and
provides guidance to teacher to choose a suitable track, by analyzing experiences of students with similar academic
achievements. 
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK 
In this paper, we have present supervised data mining algorithms , Naive Bayes (NB) algorithm applied on the
preoperative assessment data to predict success in a course (either passed or failed) and the performance of the learning
methods were evaluated based on their predictive accuracy, ease of learning and user friendly characteristics. 
The results indicate that the Naïve Bayes classifier outperforms in prediction decision tree, indicated that a good
classifier model has to be both accurate and comprehensible for professors. This study was based on traditional
classroom environments, since the data mining techniques were applied after the data was collected. It can be
concluded that this methodology can be used to help students and teachers to improve student’s performance; reduce
failing ratio by taking appropriate steps at right time to improve the quality of learning. It is important to answers how
to obtain that predicting models are user friendly for professors or nonexpert users and how to integrate data collection
system of university and data mining tool. 

Tables at a glance 




Table 1 
Table 2 
Table 3 
Table 4 


Figures at a glance 



Figure 1 
Figure 2 
Figure 5 



Figure 6 
Figure 7 
Figure 8 


References 
 EdinOsmanbegović,MirzaSuljić,”DATA MINING APPROACH FOR PREDICTING STUDENT PERFORMANCE”,Economic Review –Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. X, Issue 1, May 2012.
 Nguyen Thi Ngoc Hien and Peter Haddawy,” A Decision Support System for Evaluating International Student Applications”, 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference,2007.
 Hadkkinen I., “Do University entrance exams predict academic achievement?”,Working Paper Series, Department of Economics, Uppsala University, 2004.
 Golding P., Donaldson O., “Predicting academic performance”, Proc. 36th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 2006, 2126.
 Chowdhury A. A., “Predicting success of a beginning computer course using logistic regression”, ACM conference on Computer Science, 1987, p449.
 Dekhytar A., Goldsmith J., “The Bayesian advisor project”.
 Bekele R., Menzel W., “A Bayesian approach to predict performance of a student (BAPPS): A Case with Ethiopian Students”, Proc. IASTED International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 2005.
 Jensen F., “Bayesian Networks and Decision Graphs”, Springer Verlag, 2002.
 Klosgen, W. &Zytkow, “Handbook of data mining and knowledge discovery, Oxford University Press”, New York ,2002.
 Witten, I.H. & Frank E. “Data Mining – Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques, Second edition”, MorganKaufmann, San Francisco,2000.
 Cios, K.J., Pedrycz W., Swiniarski, R.W. & Kurgan, L.A.,”Data Mining: A Knowledge Discovery Approach”, Springer, New York,2007.
 Kumar S. A. &Vijayalakshmi M. N.,”Efficiency of Decision Trees in Predicting Student's Academic Performance”, First International Conference on Computer Science, Engineering and Applications, CS and IT 02, Dubai, pp. 335343, 2011.
 Romero, C. & Ventura, S. ,”Educational Data Mining: a Survey from 1995 to 2005, Expert Systems with Applications”, Elsevier, pp. 135146, 2007.
