STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE FUTURE RELEVANCE OF STATISTICS AFTER COMPLETING AN ONLINE INTRODUCTORY STATISTICS COURSE
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statistics educators have long recognized the importance of empowering students with statistical thinking skills that could be applied beyond the classroom. However, there is a dearth of research on how students deem statistical topics as having practical future relevance after they complete introductory courses. Focusing on student interest in and perceived value of statistics, this study reports findings from a qualitative study that examined students’ written reflections to explore the nature and extent of the perceived future relevance of statistics among undergraduate students who completed a first-year introductory statistics course online. Findings show that students deemed statistics topics as important if they could be applied to their everyday lives or their academic- and career-related interests. We conclude with recommendations for instructors of introductory statistics courses that enroll students with diverse interests and goals. First published November 2018 at Statistics Education Research Journal Archives
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.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it