MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007869189 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v9n1p280

An Evaluation of a Pilot Study of the Personal Tutoring Programme in Improving Skills Development at the University of Trinidad and Tobago

2020· article· en· W3007869189 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrew Anthony Hunte, Wasi Z. Khan, Rohanie Maharaj

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatriculationBachelorCertificateMedical educationPersonal developmentHolistic educationPsychologyMedicineEngineeringMathematics educationPedagogyComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Personal tutoring provides professional skills development and support to students as they matriculate through their respective university programmes. Recently, there has been a growing trend of students facing academic difficulties in their first year of undergraduate study at the University of Trinidad and Tobago (UTT) which have impacted on student retention rates. This paper shares the experiences of a pilot study of the Personal Tutoring Programme (PTP) launched in term 2 (January to May) of the 2018 academic year, at the UTT where five hundred and thirty-two (532) students along with forty-eight (48) personal tutors (PTs) engaged in activities that promoted academic and social support. During term 2, PTs met with their assigned tutees at least once per week. The evaluation of the PTP in skills development was based primarily on pass rates of term 2 courses in the Certificate of Applied Engineering (CAE) and Bachelor of Applied Science Common Year I (BASc Common Yr I). These programmes are used as entry requirements to specialized diploma and bachelor level programmes at UTT. Within the BASc Common Yr I, there were marked improvements in the Engineering Thermodynamics course while in the CAE programme, there were marked improvements in the Applied Engineering Mathematics II course with 100% pass rates in two campuses where it was offered. Student feedback was indicative of the positive impact of the PTP which improved students pass rates with engineering courses that traditionally were difficult for them. Overall the PTP contributed to the holistic development of the students.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207