Post-Secondary Educators’ Perceptions of Students’ Test Anxiety
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Student test anxiety (TA) is a far-reaching concern in many post-secondary institutions as it can have a negative impact on student performance and retention. Educator perceptions of TA may influence the incidence of TA as well as treatment success. As such, we surveyed educators at a medium-sized Canadian university about their perceptions and experiences with TA. In total, 90% of surveyed educators (n=50) were willing to accommodate students with TA, and 69% of educators were aware of TA support services on campus, whereas only 40% could identify symptoms of TA. Two principal components were extracted from survey responses: the importance of TA on campus, and the importance of institutional commitment to managing TA. Perceived importance of TA varied by educator age and sex, with female and older educators perceiving TA as a more serious condition than male and younger educators. Educators that were aware of TA services had a more positive view of institutional commitment to TA. In addition, 42% of educators felt limited in their ability to assist students with TA, and only 40% believed their classes were structured in such a way as to minimize or address TA. Providing information to educators about the symptoms and treatability of TA, as well as available support services is recommended. L’anxiété des étudiants face aux examens est une préoccupation qui a des implications importantes dans de nombreux établissements d’enseignement post-secondaire car elle peut avoir des effets négatifs sur les résultats des étudiants et sur leur rétention. Les perceptions des éducateurs concernant l’anxiété face aux examens risquent d’influencer l’incidence de l’anxiété ainsi que la réussite du traitement. C’est pourquoi nous avons fait un sondage auprès d’éducateurs dans une université canadienne de taille moyenne à propos de leurs perceptions et de leurs expériences concernant l’anxiété face aux examens. Au total, 90 % des éducateurs qui ont participé au sondage (n=50) étaient disposés à répondre aux besoins des étudiants souffrant d’anxiété et 69 % des éducateurs connaissaient l’existence des services de soutien disponibles sur le campus, alors que 40 % d’entre eux pouvaient identifier les symptômes de l’anxiété. Deux composantes principales ont découlé des réponses au sondage : l’importance de l’anxiété face aux examens sur le campus et l’importance de la volonté de l’établissement à gérer cette anxiété. L’importance perçue de l’anxiété variait d’un éducateur à l’autre selon l’âge et le sexe : les femmes et les enseignants plus âgés percevaient l’anxiété comme une condition plus grave par rapport aux hommes et aux enseignants plus jeunes. Les éducateurs qui connaissaient l’existence des services de soutien avaient une perception plus positive de la volonté de l’établissement à gérer l’anxiété. De plus, 42 % des éducateurs se sentaient limités dans leur aptitude à aider les étudiants qui souffraient d’anxiété et seulement 40 % d’entre eux pensaient que leurs cours étaient structurés de manière à minimiser l’anxiété ou à y remédier. Il est recommandé de fournir aux éducateurs l’information pertinente sur les symptômes et le traitement de l’anxiété ainsi que sur les services de soutien disponibles.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".