Hierarchical clustering of CDM attainment probabilities identifies five learner groups with distinct patterns of professional standards attainment¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Clustering the attainment probabilities of 178 pre-service teachers yielded five groups — Well-rounded (71), Knowledgeable and strategic (23), Student-centred (34), Novice (23), and Engaging and effective (27) — each with a distinct pattern across the four standards. → Abhinava Barthakur 2026

Evidence¶

Abhinava Barthakur 2026¶

Abhinava Barthakur, Jelena Jovanović, Ryan Baker, Vitomir Kovanović, Christopher Charles Deneen and Shane Dawson. (2026). Assessing Patterns of Students' Attainment of Professional Standards in Higher Education. Journal of Learning Analytics, 13(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2026.9035

q2 · i? · associational · r1

A hierarchical agglomerative clustering of CDM attainment probabilities for the 178-learner cohort, with cluster count chosen via dendrogram and silhouette analysis (printed widths "0.67, 0.57, 0.65, 0.52, and 0.30"). Table 4 reports per-cluster average attainments, e.g. the Well-rounded group at 0.99 (0.058) on Standard 1.

"The dendrogram ( Figure 1) and the silhouette analysis (silhouette widths were 0.67, 0.57, 0.65, 0.52, and 0.30, respectively) suggested five groups of learners with distinct patterns of standard attainment ."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• CDM-estimated attainment of professional teaching standards varies non-uniformly across standards, with Standard 1 highest (0.86) and Standard 4 lowest (0.50) — related
• Mean program GPA differs significantly across the five standards-attainment learner groups — related
• GPA fails to distinguish three pairs of learner groups that differ in standards-attainment patterns — related
• Standard 1 (knowing students) was attained relatively easily by all groups except the Novice group, while Standard 4 (supportive and safe environments) proved most challenging — related
• Latent profile analysis of pre-service teachers' CT skills identifies three profiles (Novice, Developing, Proficient), revealing heterogeneous, non-linear skill acquisition — related
• K-means clustering of factor scores identifies 10 distinct types of teacher feedback content, mostly scaffolding-oriented — related
• Exploratory K-means clustering identifies four heterogeneous student AI-user profiles differing in experience, competence, usefulness, trust, and control, but the solution's optimality and stability are not established — related
• Clustering yields a small number of behaviorally distinct team clusters that instructors can use for cluster-differentiated feedback — related
• Four distinct LLM learner profiles emerge from latent class analysis of learning contexts, tasks, and devices — related
• Cluster analysis of coherence metrics on 98 students revealed five distinct behavior profiles, with engaged and efficient students showing the highest reading scores and significantly higher science gains than all other clusters. — related
• Latent class analysis of 641 higher education students' survey responses identifies four distinct classes of feedback experience — related
• Three distinct learner profiles emerge from function art activities: Repetitivists, Simplists, and Multifunctionists — related