MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1824190324

Comparison of Biology Student Performance in Quarter and Semester Systems.

2015· article· en· W1824190324 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian B. Gibbens, Mary A. Williams, Anna K. Strain, Courtney D. M. Hoff

Notice bibliographique

RevueCollege and university · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueSchool Choice and Performance
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésQuarter (Canadian coin)ScheduleMathematics educationCurriculumPsychologyMedical educationHigher educationPedagogyMedicinePolitical scienceGeographyManagementEconomics
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

CURRICULA AT MOST COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES IN THE UNITED STATES ARE SCHEDULED ACCORD- ING TO QUARTERS OR SEMESTERS. WHILE EACH SCHEDULE HAS SEVERAL POTENTIAL ADVANTAGES OVER THE OTHER, IT IS UNCLEAR WHAT EFFECT EACH HAS ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE. THIS STUDY COMPARES BIOLOGY STUDENT PERFORMANCE DURING THE TWO AND A HALF YEARS BEFORE AND AFTER THE 1999 SWITCH FROM QUARTERS TO SEMESTERS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA-TWIN CITIES. STUDENT PERFORMANCE WAS ASSESSED BY EXAMINING GRADE DISTRIBUTIONS, POINT TOTALS, AND SCORES ON ARCHIVED EXAM QUESTIONS. THE CHANGE FROM QUARTERS TO SEMESTERS RESULTED IN A SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT OVERALL DECREASE IN STUDENT PERFORMANCE AS JUDGED BY MEAN FINAL SCORES, GRADE DISTRIBUTIONS, AND EXAM QUESTION SCORES. BECAUSE STUDENT EDUCATION IS THE PRIMARY DUTY OF COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, THESE RESULTS HAVE IMPORTANT IMPLICATIONS FOR ANY INSTITUTION CONSIDERING A CHANGE IN ITS CURRICULAR SCHEDULE.Colleges and universities have long debated the utility and effectiveness of different academic calendars. While many calendar systems exist, the early-start semester and the modern quarter system are the most common. The early-start semester begins after Labor Day and runs until Christmas; late-start semesters run from mid-September until late January (Stainburn 2008). The modern quarter system has a year-round calendar such that most students study for three consecutive quarters with an optional summer quarter. The decision to adopt one calendar over another has been based primarily on the perceived benefits to students (Table 1, on page 14) and on the perceived ad- ministrative, logistical, and faculty benefits (Table 2, on page 15) associated with each.Much thought has been devoted to the pros and cons of the semester and quarter calendars, but relatively few studies have addressed their effect on student performance. One study that examined student attitudes about personal performance in each system found that although students had a slightly lower G PA in the semester calendar (1.443 vs.1.568), the students believed that the grades they received more accurately reflected what they learned (Mertes 1969). The study's authors speculated that students may have performed better in the quarter system because (1) they were under more pressure to learn the material, (1) the semester exams were more challenging and open ended whereas the quarter exams were based more on fact-recall questions, and/or (3) faculty on the quarter system may have graded less stringently (Mertes 1969). Another study found that changing from a quarter to a semester calendar had an adverse effect on student grades and course completion rates (Coleman, Boite & Franklin 1984). Because data were examined only from one quarter before and two semesters after the change, this decrease could have been a temporary result. A review of Dutch studies that have examined the effect of academic calendars on student performance revealed that rather than studying throughout the term, students on a semester calendar tended to study right before their exams (Jansen 1993). The review concluded that the extra time in the semester encouraged cramming and procrastination.This work investigates changes in student performance in BIOL 1009, a non-major general biology course at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities (umntc) two and a half years before and two and a half years after changing from a quarter calendar to an early-start semester calendar. Undergraduate student performance was assessed by examining mean final course scores, grade distributions, and question-specific performance on exam questions that were asked both before and after the change in calendar. The exam questions were categorized according to the following topics: evolution, genetics, ecology, cell biology, organismal biology, metabolism, and the chemical and physical basis for life (capb). This categorization allowed investigation of whether the change from the quarter to the early-start semester calendar had a disproportionate effect on student performance on a particular topic. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,010
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,019

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,047
Tête enseignante GPT0,327
Écart entre enseignants0,280 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCollege and universityMême sujetSchool Choice and PerformanceTravaux en français237 207