Home All Issues Issue articles Previous article Next article

Predicting Students’ Academic Achievements in Physics Using Fuzzy Logic-Based

Belay Sitotaw Goshu 1 *
1 Dire Dawa University, ETHIOPIA * Corresponding Author
Educational Point, 2(2), 2025, e141, https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17669
Publication date: Dec 31, 2025
Research Article
Open Access Open Access
Download PDF

ABSTRACT

Enhancing students' academic performance in higher education is a primary goal, necessitating a systematic and adaptable approach. Traditional methods for analyzing student performance data often struggle with complexity and unpredictability, making them inadequate for handling intricate educational patterns. As a result, the development of fuzzy logic-based decision-making systems has become increasingly important. This study aims to design an accurate fuzzy logic system for predicting first-year physics students' academic achievement at Dire Dawa University. The model leverages the fuzzy library, defining membership functions for participation in experiments and discussions (categorized as low, medium, and high). It then establishes rules to map participation levels to predicted grades (poor, average, good, and excellent). The analysis involved applying the fuzzy logic system to a dataset and validating the predictions against actual grades. The findings revealed that the model accurately predicted grades for medium participation (e.g., 50.00 for 50% participation) but tended to overestimate high participation levels (e.g., predicting 85.00 when the actual score was 67.51). This research contributes to educational technology by providing a flexible predictive tool that can be expanded to other STEM disciplines, enhancing data-driven decision-making in academic settings. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of fuzzy logic in managing educational uncertainties, though refinements are needed to address overestimation and incorporate additional variables such as study habits and prior knowledge.

KEYWORDS

fuzzy logic academic achievement physics education student participation teaching strategies

CITATION (APA)

Goshu, B. S. (2025). Predicting Students’ Academic Achievements in Physics Using Fuzzy Logic-Based. Educational Point, 2(2), e141. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17669
Harvard
Goshu, B. S. (2025). Predicting Students’ Academic Achievements in Physics Using Fuzzy Logic-Based. Educational Point, 2(2), e141. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17669
Vancouver
Goshu BS. Predicting Students’ Academic Achievements in Physics Using Fuzzy Logic-Based. Educational Point. 2025;2(2):e141. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17669
AMA
Goshu BS. Predicting Students’ Academic Achievements in Physics Using Fuzzy Logic-Based. Educational Point. 2025;2(2), e141. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17669
Chicago
Goshu, Belay Sitotaw. "Predicting Students’ Academic Achievements in Physics Using Fuzzy Logic-Based". Educational Point 2025 2 no. 2 (2025): e141. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17669
MLA
Goshu, Belay Sitotaw "Predicting Students’ Academic Achievements in Physics Using Fuzzy Logic-Based". Educational Point, vol. 2, no. 2, 2025, e141. https://doi.org/10.71176/edup/17669

REFERENCES

  1. Anapali Şenel, A., Göksu, B., Şenel, E., & Solmaz, F. I. (2025). Predicting academic performance with fuzzy logic in prospective physical education and sports teachers. Scientific Reports, 15, Article 28241. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-99124-3
  2. Alyahyan, E., & Düştegör, D. (2020). Predicting academic success in higher education: Literature review and best practices. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-0177-7
  3. Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. Jossey Bass.
  4. Aziz, A., & Hashem, M.M.A. (2021). Fuzzy logic-based assessment of students learning outcome in implementing outcome-basededucation. In Arefin, M.S., Kaiser, M.S., Bandyopadhyay, A., Ahad, M.A.R., Ray, K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Big Data, IoT, and Machine Learning. Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies, 95, 745-759. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-6636-0_56
  5. Biswas, R. (1995). An application of fuzzy sets in students’ evaluation. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 74(2), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(95)00063-Q
  6. Bonfield, C. A., Salter, A. M., Longmuir, M., Benson, M., & Adachi, C. (2020). Transformation or evolution? Education 4.0, teaching and learning in the digital age. Higher Education Pedagogies, 5(1), 223–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2020.1816847
  7. Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE ERIC Higher Education Reports.
  8. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032
  9. Chankseliani, M., & McCowan, T. (2021). Higher education and the sustainable development goals. Higher Education, 81(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00652-w
  10. Chen, S., & Yuanzhao, D. (2023). A machine learning approach to predicting academic performance in Pennsylvania’s schools. Social Sciences, 12(3), Article 118. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12030118
  11. Chong, K. T., Ibrahim, N., Huspi, S. H., Wan Kadir, W. H. N., & Isa, M. A. (2025). A systematic review of machine learning techniques for predicting student engagement in higher education online learning. Journal of Information Technology Education, 24, Article 5. https://doi.org/10.28945/5456
  12. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
  13. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference (pp. 9–15). https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
  14. De Wit, H. (2019). Internationalization in higher education: A critical review. SFU Educational Review, 12(3), 9–17. https://doi.org/10.21810/sfuer.v12i3.1036
  15. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage.
  16. Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw Hill Education.
  17. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
  18. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
  19. Jang, J. S. R., Sun, C. T., & Mizutani, E. (1997). Neuro fuzzy and soft computing: A computational approach to learning and machine intelligence. Prentice Hall.
  20. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom (2nd ed.). Interaction Book Company.
  21. Kassa, A., & Tefera, M. (2024). Predictive modeling in Ethiopian high school performance data: A fuzzy inference approach. Ethiopian Journal of Educational Measurement, 11(1), 17–30.
  22. Kumar, S., Singh, B., & Agarwal, M.M. (2025). Analysis and design of fuzzy logic based adaptive e-learning and evaluation framework. International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 11(5s), 698-711. https://doi.org/10.64252/1dsybr82 & https://theaspd.com/index.php/ijes/article/view/1260/976
  23. Mendel, J. M. (2017). Uncertain rule based fuzzy systems: Introduction and new directions. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51370-6
  24. Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. Columbia University Press.
  25. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
  26. Rabelo, A. Rodrigues, M.M. Nobre, C. Isotani, S. and Zárate, L. (2024). Educational data mining and learning analytics: a review ofeducational management in e-learning, Information Discovery and Delivery, 52(2), 149–163, https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-10-2022-0099
  27. Ross, T. J. (2010). Fuzzy logic with engineering applications (3rd ed.). Wiley.
  28. Ross, T. J. (2016). Fuzzy logic with engineering applications (4th ed.). Wiley.
  29. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
  30. Tadesse, F., & Abate, Y. (2020). The effectiveness of gamified learning in Ethiopian science classrooms: A mixed methods study. Ethiopian Journal of Education and Sciences, 15(2), 40–52.
  31. Teichler, U. (2009). Higher education and the world of work. Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087907563
  32. Terenzini, P. T., Cabrera, A. F., C Bernal, E. M. (2001). Swimming against the tide: The poor in American higher education (College Board Research Report No. 2001-1). College Board. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED562879.pdf
  33. Ugwunna, C.O., Emefoh, A.C., Adeyemi. R.O., Nzeribe, S.O., & Uchefuna, C.I. (2021). Predicting students academicperformance using fuzzy logic. Journal of Basic Physical Research, 10(2), 149-164, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365343264_Predicting_Students_Academic_Performance_Using_Fuzzy_Logic
  34. Waheed, H., Hassan, S. U., Aljohani, N. R., Hardman, J., Alelyani, S., & Nawaz, R. (2020). Predicting academic performance of students from VLE big data using deep learning models. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, Article 106189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106189
  35. Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.