Factors affecting assignment completion in higher education
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to simultaneously investigate a variety of factors related to assignment completion (AC) (i.e. task orientation, cooperation, teacher feedback, time management and time spent on AC). Design/methodology/approach The study relied on a self-report survey to assess students' perceptions in relation to six variables. Participants included 1,106 undergraduate students from six public Thai universities. Analysis involved structural equation modeling. Findings This study provided new results related to task orientation as the strongest predictor of AC and time management. Cooperation and feedback improved AC with time management as an intervening variable. Time management and feedback did not predict time spent on AC. Research limitations/implications Future studies might explore the potential range of assignments that, for example, count for a higher portion of the grade versus those that are less or unimportant in terms of the course. Future studies might also look at the role of group assignments in relation to completion. Semi-structured interviews or observations might provide insights into how students manage their time and why task orientation has the most effect on AC. Future research might investigate more specifically at what point time management does or does not affect completion. In general, given the growth of online learning and contexts in which students may be increasingly called on to complete assignments independently, factors such as those investigated in this study will require more attention in varying countries and contexts, generically and for individual subjects. Practical implications Instructional designers and instructors can promote task orientation through reliance on strategic scaffolding. For designing a task-oriented environment, instructors need to offer challenging assignments. Instructors should also assign work that encourages motivation, effort and achievement. To ensure that cooperative learning positively affects time management, instructors and designers can allot specific in-class time for completion of tasks, reliance on flipped classroom activities and student conversations regarding time restrictions and time-management skills. Instructors can be supported to help them provide appropriate types of feedback, as well as ideas for implementing the feedback in practice. Originality/value Little research has been conducted on AC in higher education. Those studies that have been conducted have focused on the elementary and secondary levels. Furthermore, studies have not always taken into account the complex relationships between different factors that can potentially influence AC.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».