Test-Anxiety Program and Test Gains with Nursing Classes.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nursing programs can be highly stressful, and nursing students have been found to be more test-anxious than other students. The present investigation examines a practical program to reduce test-anxiety impairment and improve academic performance for a significant number of highly anxious nursing students. Incoming nursing students were screened using the Westside Test Anxiety scale, and half (42 of 84) were identified as having highor moderately-high anxiety and were randomly assigned to an Treatment or an information Control group. Students in both groups were introduced to their material and encouraged to review it. Students took the comprehensive Evolve/HESI exit exam in the early spring. The Treatment group showed a significant 12+ percentile gain over the Control group on the HESI (p<.05), and a 9 percentile gain over the Controls on their spring GPAs The active control treatment protocol used here is seen to provide a cost-effective intervention to improve test performance. Circumstances permitting, the authors recommend that nursing programs include provisions for highly anxious students. Test-Anxiety Program and Test Gains 2 Approximately 16%—20% of students are found to have high test anxiety, according to various studies (cf. Ergene, 2003), and a Canadian survey finds that adolescents worry about tests and schoolwork more than about any other aspect of their lives (McGuire et al. 1987). Nursing students are found to be even more test anxious than are students in other fields. Nursing students face the same pressures as other students, and in addition many are also under the impression that an inadvertent mistake might seriously harm a patient as well jeopardize their own careers. Surveys of some 600 nursing students in two separate colleges identified just over 35% with high test anxiety (Driscoll et al., 2009; Wheeler, 2010). Highly test-anxious students are found to score about 12 percentile points below their low anxiety counterparts (Cassady & Johnson, 2002; Hembree, 1988; McDonald, 2001), and the anxiety itself is thought to be a major contributing factor (cf. Lee, 1999). The current study is to assess the feasibility and benefits of a broadly implemented test-anxiety treatment program.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".