MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084415890 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v1n1p176

Self-concept and Performance of Secondary School Students in Mathematics

2011· article· en· W2084415890 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oluwatayo James Ayodele

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationMathematicsPearson product-moment correlation coefficientTest (biology)PsychologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study investigated the relationship between self-concept and performance in Mathematics as well as theinfluence of gender on self-concept and performance in Mathematics. 320 SS1 students (male=160, female=160)were used for the study. They were selected from 16 secondary schools (urban=8, rural=8) in eight localgovernment areas of Ekiti State. Random sampling was used to select the local government areas, while stratifiedrandom sampling technique was used to select the schools and the participants. Data were collected using a20-item self-concept questionnaire and a 30-item multiple-choice Mathematics Achievement Test with reliabilitycoefficients of 0.74 and 0.83 respectively, and analysed using Pearson product moment correlation and t-teststatistics, tested at 0.05 level of significance. The results showed that self-concept moderately correlated withperformance in Mathematics, while gender had no significant influence on self-concept and performance inMathematics. However, the mean scores of male and female students in Mathematics were below average. It wassuggested that teachers should develop in their students positive self-concept towards Mathematics and pleasantteaching experiences to enhance higher self-concept and better performance in mathematics.

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)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations30
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessFrench-language works237,207