Significant predictors of mathematical literacy for top‐tiered countries/economies, Canada, and the United States on PISA 2012: Case for the sparse regression model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: National ranking from the triennial Programme of International Student Assessment (PISA) often serves as a barometer of national performance and human capital. Though excessive student- and school-level covariates (n > 700) may prove intractable for traditional least-squares estimate procedures, shrinkage methods may be more suitable for subset selection. AIMS: With a focus on the United States, this paper proposes sparse regression for PISA 2012 to discover salient student- and school-level predictor variables for mathematical literacy achievement. SAMPLE: The sparse regression analysis was conducted on 10 top-tiered OECD countries/economies, Canada, and the United States in mathematical literacy on the 2012 PISA. Two- and three-level hierarchical regression analyses were performed on Canadian and US students (N = 26,522) along with five of the ten top-tiered countries/economies (N = 58,385). METHODS: Using the 'least absolute shrinkage and selection operator' (LASSO) technique, the study (1) identified salient predictor variables of mathematical literacy performance for the top-tiered countries/economies, Canada, and the United States and (2) used these salient variables to perform two- and three-level hierarchical regression on data from Canada and the United States along with five top-tiered countries/economies. Weights and replicates were used to account for complex sample design. A weighted, two-level confirmatory factor analysis was performed to identify latent constructs. Missing data were handled through multiple imputation. RESULTS: Separate two-level hierarchical models accounted for 32-35% student-level and 58-70% school-level variance in Canada and the United States, respectively; three-level models accounted for 33% of level-one variance, 62-65% level-two variance, and 13-44% of level-three variance for the US/Canada and US/Canada/top-tiered students, respectively. Following top-tiered countries/economies, Canadian students had high levels of self-efficacy, were more likely to encounter advanced concepts in class, were less activity/small group-centred, and were more likely to consider truancy a learning hindrance. Factor analyses revealed a positive relation with rigour and class organization (teacher-centred) for top-tiered countries and Canada, though not for the United States. For all countries, there was a strong relation between rigour and self-beliefs. CONCLUSION: Compared to top performers, a less rigorous curriculum, coupled with class and school factors, may explain lag in US performance.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".