MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2199565349 · doi:10.5539/ies.v8n11p239

The Influence of Mathematics Anxiety in Middle and High School Students Math Achievement

2015· article· en· W2199565349 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masooma Ali Al Mutawah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumMathematical anxietyMathematics educationAnxietyPsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p class="apa">Math anxiety has been the focus of much psychological and educational research in the past few years, there are many international studies showing that mathematics anxiety is an influence on student’s achievements in school, but little research has been done about this issue in Bahrain. Bahrain is a country in the Arabian Gulf region, its economic development is increasing rapidly, and there is currently a focus on improving the school education outcomes to fit the 21st century requirements. Bahrain started a huge curriculum project in September 2013 by changing the primary math curriculum across the country, and will continue the changes to secondary curriculum in the coming years. These changes are intended to improve mathematics education in the country, since Bahraini math scores have been below the international mean for a very long time. This study attempts to investigate if there is a relationship between anxiety and underachieving in mathematics in Bahrain. The Revised Mathematics Anxiety (R-MANX) Survey (Bursal, 2006) was translated into Arabic and administered to 1352 primary students. The data was analyzed to explore the reliability and validity of the translated survey and the associations between Mathematics anxiety and achievement. This paper reports the findings of the study.</p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations46
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicEducation, Achievement, and GiftednessFrench-language works237,207