Transitioning from Quarters to Semesters: Changes in College Students' Predicted and Perceived Motivation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A NUMBER OF U.S. HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS ARE CONVERTING FROM QUARTERTO SEMESTER-BASED ACADEMIC CALENDARS; IN FALL 2012, SEVENTEEN OHIO INSTITUTIONS DID SO. OVER A TWO-YEAR TIME PERIOD, COLLEGE STUDENT SAMPLES WERE RECRUITED FROM A LARGE, PUBLIC, URBAN, MIDWESTERN UNIVERSITY THAT WAS UNDERGOING A TRANSITION FROM A QUARTER-BASED TO A SEMESTER-BASED CALENDAR. RESULTS INDICATE THAT DURING THEIR LAST YEAR ON THE QUARTER CALENDAR, MOST STUDENTS FAVORED THAT SYSTEM AND PREDICTED LITTLE TO NO CHANGE IN THEIR MOTIVATION HEADING INTO SEMESTERS; BUT AFTER THEIR FIRST YEAR ON THE SEMESTER CALENDAR, THEIR FAVORITISM OF QUARTERS DECREASED. THIS MIXED METHODS STUDY ASSESSED COLLEGE STUDENTS' FAVORITISM OF QUARTERS AND SEMESTERS; THEIR PREDICTED AND PERCEIVED CHANGES TO THEIR MOTIVATED BEHAVIORS; AND THEIR SELF-REPORTED MOTIVATION. EVEN THOUGH MOST STUDENTS PERCEIVED LITTLE TO NO CHANGE IN THEIR MOTIVATION AFTER THE CONVERSION TO THE SEMESTER CALENDAR, THERE WAS A NOTICEABLE INCREASE IN THE PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS WHO REPORTED HAVING ADOPTED MALADAPTIVE BEHAVIORS AND BECOMING DE-MOTIVATED. DESPITE THIS INCREASE, A STATISTICAL INCREASE IN STUDENTS' SELFEFFICACY TOWARD THEIR COURSEWORK WAS ALSO OBSERVED. IMPLICATIONS OF THESE FINDINGS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ARE DISCUSSED.Seventeen higher education institutions in Ohio converted from FUTURE RESEARCH quarter to semester systems in 2012-13 (Farkas 2012, Pyle 2009, Pyle 2012). Other institutions and systems that have undergone similar transitions include the Rochester Institute of Technology, California State University-Los Angeles, Auburn University, the University of Minnesota system, the Utah State system, and Northeastern University (Mayberry 2009). The decision to convert to a semester system is typically multifaceted (see Quann 1998), with rationales ranging from the financial to student transfer and curriculum, to name a few. The University System of Ohio (2012) identifies credit transfers as the greatest factor in the decision to make the change. Those who believe that all higher education institutions in Ohio should operate according to the same academic calendar contend that the change to a semester calendar would enable students to transfer credits more easily to different institutions within the state (Fingerhut 2010).Despite the perceived benefits of converting to semesters, student motivation is rarely a primary focus of decision maldng about such a conversion; yet research indicates that achievement motivation may greatly influence students' learning outcomes. Motivation is defined as the process whereby goal-directed actions are instigated and sustained (Schunk, Pintrich and Meece 2014). Therefore, it is worth considering that an institution's change of its academic calendar may alter its students' goaldirected actions. The conversion from three ten-week quarters to two fifteen-week semesters has the potential to change how students manage their time and/or their confidence in their ability to maintain their energy and focus throughout a fifteen-week academic term. Students who become fatigued (or de-motivated) as a result of the change may behave in a manner that is maladaptive to their learning and/or to the institution's mission. At the same time, students who perceive that a fifteen-week semester will provide them with more time to master course content may adapt their learning strategies (e.g., time management, self-regulation, etc.) accordingly. Thus, even though the decision to convert from a quarterto a semester-based calendar may rest primarily on issues related to institutional finances, student transfer protocols, and/or curriculum changes, the decision can have significant implications for student-motivated behaviors.The literature suggests that faculty members favor semesters whereas students (undergraduates in particular) appear to favor quarters (Pyle 2007, 2009, 2012). Explanations for the difference include the notion that undergraduates may favor quarters because they are shorter and provide more opportunities to quickly obtain grades to demonstrate their competence {i. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".