Gap in University Students' Performance: a Study in a Malaysian Public University L'ECART DANS LA PERFORMANCE DES ETUDIANTS: UNE ÉTUDE DANS UNE UNIVERSITÉ PUBLIQUE MALAISIENNE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A body of literature has shown that testing students before their final examination serves as a motivational technique. These studies found that having test assessment would stimulates students’ study effort and eventually improve their final examination score. Therefore, and arguably, students who performed well in their test assessment would reflect similar performance in their final examination. However, research has shown that students’ scores in their test assessment may not be reflected in their final examination, creating a gap between the two scores. This study examines whether there is a gap in university accounting students’ performance between their test assessment score and their final examination score. If there is a gap between the two scores, this study further attempts to identify the factors that influence the gap between the two scores the gap. Four factors were chosen, namely, academic aptitude, preparation time, quantum of rewards offered and evaluation environment. Using questionnaire and secondary data of students’ actual performance, this study provides evidence that there is a gap between the assessment score and the final examination score. Further findings show that out of the four factors, evaluation environment plays a significant factor in causing the gap between the two scores. The results of this study provide some understanding to academics and universities on the importance of evaluation environment to students’ performance. Key words: Gap; test assessment; final examination; accounting students Resume: Beaucoup d’etudes ont montre que le test avant l’examen final des etudiants sert de motivation technique. Ces etudes ont revele que le fait d'avoir le test d'evaluation pourrait stimuler l'effort d’etude des etudiants et, eventuellement, ameliorer leur resultat dans l’examen final. Par consequent, les etudiants qui ont obtenu un bon resultat dans leur test d'evaluation pourraient avoir des performances similaires dans leur examen final. Cependant, la recherche a egalement montre que le resultat des etudiants dans le test d’evaluation pourrait aussi ne pas etre reflete dans leur examen final, ce qui cree un ecart entre ces deux resultats . Cette etude examine si il y a ce genre d’ecart chez les etudiants en comptabilite entre leur resultat de test d'evaluation et de leur examen final. S'il y a un ecart entre les deux evaluations, cette etude tente d'identifier les facteurs qui influent sur l'ecart entre ces deux evaluations. Quatre facteurs ont ete choisies, a savoir l'aptitude scolaire, le temps de preparation, le quantum de recompenses offertes et l' environnement d’evaluation. En utilisant le questionnaire et les donnees secondaires de la performance reelle des eleves, cette etude fournit la preuve qu'il existe un ecart entre le resultat du test d'evaluation et celui de l'examen final. D'autres resultats plus approfondis montrent que l' environnement d’evaluation joue un role important dans la provocation de l'ecart entre les deux resultats. Les resultats de cette etude fournissent une certaine comprehension pour les academies et les universites sur l'importance de l' environnement d’evaluation vis a vis de la performance des etudiants. Mots-Cles: ecart; test d’evaluation; examen final; etudiant en comptabilite
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".