Influence of School Certificate English Achievement and Faculty on Course of Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study was to find out the influence of both students’ achievement in the West African Examination Council’s Senior School Certificate English Language examination and the faculty of study by the students in the university on their performances in Use of English and in specific courses of study. 964 undergraduate students of Cross River University of Technology, Calabar, Nigeria, were sampled for the study. The students’ results in the Senior School Certificate English Language examination, scores obtained by them in the Use of English course at the university and their cumulative grade point averages in their specific courses of study at the university were the data collected and used for the study. Four hypotheses were postulated and tested at 0.05 level of significance, using mean, standard deviation and analysis of variance as statistical tools. It was found out that achievement in the Senior School Certificate English Language examination and Use of English course at the university contribute significantly to the variance in students’ academic performance in specific courses of study; significant differences exist in the academic achievement of students in various faculties in the Senior School Certificate English Language examination; faculty of study does not significantly influence students’ academic achievement in Use of English, and faculty of study does not significantly influence academic performances in specific courses of study. The study thus canvassed that admission of students into different faculties in the university should not be determined by their level of achievement in the Senior School Certificate English Language examination.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".