MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Factors Associated With Mathematics Achievement and Participation in Advanced Mathematics Courses: An Examination of Gender Differences From an International Perspective

2005· article· en· W1999045574 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kadriye Ercikan, Tanya McCreith, Vanessa Lapointe

Bibliographic record

VenueSchool Science and Mathematics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSchool Choice and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocioeconomic statusPerspective (graphical)Mathematics educationAcademic achievementExploratory researchPsychologyMathematicsDemographySocial scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports results of an exploratory study examining factors that might be associated with achievement in mathematics and participation in advanced mathematics courses in Canada, Norway, and the United States of America (USA). These factors, which were not directly related to schooling accounted for large degrees of variability, 24% to 39%, in mathematics achievement scores. Confidence in mathematics was the strongest predictor of achievement for students from Canada and Norway, whereas for the students from the USA, parents' highest education level was the highest predictor of achievement. Student home environment related variables were stronger predictors of achievement for females than for males in all three countries. The participation in advanced mathematics courses could be predicted with 72% to 76% accuracy by the same variables. In all of the three countries, the strongest predictors of participation in advanced mathematics courses were students' attitudes toward mathematics. Parents' education level, a socioeconomic related variable, was one of the strongest predictors of participation for Canadian female students and all students from the USA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations98
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchool Science and MathematicsSame topicSchool Choice and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207