Grouping approaches are commonly employed in chemistry education research to better understand variation. Traditionally used as a tool for data dimensionality reduction, these approaches are used as a tool to help researchers interpret complex data sets that can inform instructional strategies or target interventions. Among these techniques, cluster analysis, and in particular k -means clustering, has gained popularity for its simplicity and applicability to continuous variables. However, k -means cluster analysis is limited by its algorithmic nature, including assumptions of equal variance between clusters. Latent profile analysis, a model-based alternative within the mixture modeling framework, offers greater flexibility by allowing probabilistic group membership and the modeling of individual variances and covariances across latent profiles. This methods-focused study compares k -means clustering and latent profile analysis using data from undergraduate organic chemistry students enrolled in courses with either traditional or specifications grading. By examining students’ affective traits, this study highlights the strengths and limitations of each grouping approach. Findings support the broader adoption of mixture modeling in chemistry education research to explore heterogeneity.
Yik et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: