An Analysis of Grades, Class Level and Faculty Evaluation Scores in the United Arab Emirates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p class="apa">This study examined the results of a student evaluation of faculty against the grades awarded and the level of the course for a higher education institution in the United Arab Emirates. The purpose of the study was to determine if the grades awarded in the course and/or level of the course impacted the evaluation scores awarded to the faculty member. The study utilized a 25-question student perception survey coupling course results with the overall course grade point average (GPA) and the course level. All courses were undergraduate. Descriptives for the responses were obtained prior to conducting a factor analysis for the purposes of dimension reduction. The analysis included 184 course pairings. The data set was examined to verify satisfaction of assumptions appropriate for factor analysis. Reliability analysis yielded a Chronbach’s alpha of 0.974. The factor analysis identified three underlying factors accounting for 80.07% of the variance. These three factors were identified as (1) overall perception of instruction, (2) the relationship of the grade and course level and (3) course management. Results of the study did not indicate that the grades given in a class nor the level of the course significantly affected the evaluations provided by the students. Grades and the level of the course were found to align. Student achievement in the course was also found to relate to the student’s perception of fair treatment by the faculty member.</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 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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".