International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science (IJITCS)
IJITCS Vol. 18, No. 5, 8 Oct. 2026
Cover page and Table of Contents: PDF (size: 1242KB)
Monitoring Student Learning Outcomes: Student Dropout Prediction Model Using Subgraph Matching Approach
PDF (1242KB), PP.83-96
Views: 0 Downloads: 0
Author(s)
Meilia Nur Indah Susanti
1,2,*
Yaya Heryadi
1
Yusep Rosmansyah
3
Widodo Budiharto
1
Index Terms
Student Dropout Prediction, Graph-Based Learning Analytics, Subgraph Matching, Early Warning System, Academic Performance Monitoring
Abstract
Student dropout is still a crucial issue in many colleges and universities in countries including Indonesia despite various initiatives that have been implemented to reduce its rate. As a preventive effort, many educational institutions continuously monitor several factors that potentially affect student graduation and dropout rates. However, the increasing ratio of student numbers to administrative staff has made manual processes inefficient. This paper presents a novel method to monitor student learning outcomes using a subgraph matching approach to identify students who potentially drop out early or fail to graduate due to low learning achievement. This study emphasizes diagnostic accuracy in identifying students at risk of dropping out as the main focus of the proposed contribution. Performance assessment is directed at the model's ability to accurately distinguish between at-risk and not-at-risk students, particularly through evaluations that emphasize the minority class. This approach strengthens the model's role as the foundation of a more reliable early warning system relevant to supporting academic decision-making. In this research, the academic achievement of each student is represented as a graph that represents the relationship between each student and courses that have been enrolled in the previous semesters. By comparing the learning achievement pattern between each student and those students who have either "graduated" or "dropped out", the students with elevated dropout risk can be identified in a computationally efficient manner. The experiment findings showed that the proposed method can identify students with elevated dropout risk with 89.47% average accuracy. Graph-based approaches are capable of capturing structural relationships and complex interaction patterns among student activities that cannot be explicitly represented by other models. Although subgraph matching is known to have high computational complexity, the identification process can be accelerated through subgraph pattern constraints, preprocessing strategies, and search optimizations, thereby supporting claims of efficiency both theoretically and practically.
Cite This Paper
Meilia Nur Indah Susanti, Yaya Heryadi, Yusep Rosmansyah, Widodo Budiharto, "Monitoring Student Learning Outcomes: Student Dropout Prediction Model Using Subgraph Matching Approach", International Journal of Information Technology and Computer Science(IJITCS), Vol.18, No.5, pp.83-96, 2026. DOI:10.5815/ijitcs.2026.05.06
Reference
[1]L. Feng et al., “Transforming Undergraduate STEM Education: The Learning Assistant Model and Student Retention and Graduation Rates,” Res. High. Educ., vol. 66, no. 1, p. 4, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s11162-024-09823-5.
[2]E. Demeter, M. Dorodchi, E. Al-Hossami, A. Benedict, L. Slattery Walker, and J. Smail, “Predicting first-time-in-college students’ degree completion outcomes,” High. Educ., vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 589–609, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10734-021-00790-9.
[3]M. R. Julianti, Y. Heryadi, B. Yulianto, and W. Budiharto, “Recommendation System Model for Personalized Learning in Higher Education using Content-Based Filtering Method,” in 2022 International Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech), Aug. 2022, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/ICIMTech55957.2022.9915109.
[4]M. A. Mohamed Hashim, I. Tlemsani, and R. Matthews, “Higher education strategy in digital transformation,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 3171–3195, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10639-021-10739-1.
[5]R. Susanto, R. Rachmadtullah, and W. Rachbini, “Technological and Pedagogical Models: Analysis of Factors and Measurement of Learning Outcomes in Education,” J. Ethn. Cult. Stud., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 1–14, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.29333/ejecs/311.
[6]P. Guo, N. Saab, L. S. Post, and W. Admiraal, “A review of project-based learning in higher education: Student outcomes and measures,” Int. J. Educ. Res., vol. 102, no. May, p. 101586, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101586.
[7]J. Xu, K. H. Moon, and M. Van Der Schaar, “A Machine Learning Approach for Tracking and Predicting Student Performance in Degree Programs,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Signal Process., vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 742–753, 2017, doi: 10.1109/JSTSP.2017.2692560.
[8]O. Zawacki-Richter, V. I. Marín, M. Bond, and F. Gouverneur, “Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators?,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 16, no. 1, p. 39, Dec. 2019, doi: 10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0.
[9]Z. Kanetaki, C. Stergiou, G. Bekas, C. Troussas, and C. Sgouropoulou, “A Hybrid Machine Learning Model for Grade Prediction in Online Engineering Education,” Int. J. Eng. Pedagog., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 4–23, 2022, doi: 10.3991/IJEP.V12I3.23873.
[10]A. M. N. Alzubaidi, “Lightgbm for Link Prediction Based on Graph Structure Attributes,” ICIC Express Lett. Part B Appl., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 303–311, 2023, doi: 10.24507/icicelb.14.03.303.
[11]C. Schröer, F. Kruse, and J. M. Gómez, “A systematic literature review on applying CRISP-DM process model,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 181, no. 2019, pp. 526–534, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2021.01.199.
[12]Y. Liu, “ORB feature based neighbor graph construction method for graph regularized non-negative matrix factorization,” ICIC Express Lett. Part B Appl., vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 2197–2203, 2016, doi: 10.77127/PEERJ-CS.267.
[13]S. Ji, S. Pan, E. Cambria, P. Marttinen, and P. S. Yu, “A Survey on Knowledge Graphs: Representation, Acquisition, and Applications,” IEEE Trans. Neural Networks Learn. Syst., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 494–514, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.1109/TNNLS.2021.3070843.
[14]Q. Cheng, D. Yan, T. Wu, Z. Huang, and Q. Zhang, “Computing Approximate Graph Edit Distance via Optimal Transport,” Proc. ACM Manag. Data, vol. 3, no. 1, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.1145/3709673.
[15]C. Zou, G. Lu, L. Du, X. Zeng, and S. Lin, “Graph similarity learning for cross-level interactions,” Inf. Process. Manag., vol. 62, no. 1, p. 103932, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2024.103932.
[16]A. Sanfeliu and K.-S. Fu, “A distance measure between attributed relational graphs for pattern recognition,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern., vol. SMC-13, no. 3, pp. 353–362, May 1983, doi: 10.1109/TSMC.1983.6313167.
[17]Y. Yang, L. Xie, Z. Fu, J. Yan, and S. M. Naqvi, “Pose-oriented scene-adaptive matching for abnormal event detection,” Neurocomputing, vol. 611, p. 128673, 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2024.128673.
[18] Q. Tan et al., “Graph-Based Target Association for Multi-Drone Collaborative Perception Under Imperfect Detection Conditions,” Drones, vol. 9, no. 4. p. 300, 2025. doi: 10.3390/drones9040300.
[19]M. Li, C. Liu, X. Pan, and Z. Li, “Digital twin-assisted graph matching multi-task object detection method in complex traffic scenarios,” Sci. Rep., vol. 15, no. 1, p. 10847, 2025, doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-87914-8.
[20]Z. Sun, H. Wang, H. Wang, B. Shao, and J. Li, “Efficient subgraph matching on billion node graphs,” arXiv Prepr. arXiv1205.6691, 2012, doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1205.6691.
[21]L. T. M. Blessing and A. Chakrabarti, “Descriptive Study I: Understanding Design,” in DRM, a Design Research Methodology, London: Springer London, 2009, pp. 75–140. doi: 10.1007/978-1-84882-587-1_4.
[22]V. Plotnikova, M. Dumas, and F. Milani, “Adaptations of data mining methodologies: A systematic literature review,” PeerJ Comput. Sci., vol. 6, pp. 1–43, 2020, doi: 10.7717/PEERJ-CS.267.
[23]C. Piao, T. Xu, X. Sun, Y. Rong, K. Zhao, and H. Cheng, “Computing Graph Edit Distance via Neural Graph Matching,” Proc. VLDB Endow., vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 1817–1829, 2023, doi: 10.14778/3594512.359451.