Gender differences in introductory university physics performance: The influence of high school physics preparation and affect
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
The attrition of females studying physics after high school is a concern to the science education community. Most undergraduate science programs require introductory physics coursework. Thus, success in introductory physics is necessary for students to progress to higher levels of science study. Success also influences attitudes; if females are well-prepared, feel confident, and do well in introductory physics, they may be inclined to study physics further. This quantitative study using multilevel modeling focused on determining factors from high school physics preparation (content, pedagogy, and assessment) and the affective domain that influenced female and male performance in introductory university physics. The study controlled for some university/course level characteristics as well as student demographic and academic background characteristics. The data consisted of 1973 surveys from 54 introductory physics courses within 35 universities across the US. The results highlight high school physics and affective experiences that differentially influenced female and male performance. These experiences include: learning requirements, computer graphing/analysis, long written problems, everyday world examples, community projects, cumulative tests/quizzes, father's encouragement, family's belief that science leads to a better career, and the length of time students believed that high school physics would help in university physics. There were also experiences that had a similar influence on female and male performance. Positively related to performance were: covering fewer topics for longer periods of time, the history of physics as a recurring topic, physics-related videos, and test/quiz questions that involved calculations and/or were drawn from standardized tests. Negatively related to performance were: student-designed projects, reading/discussing labs the day before performing them, microcomputer based laboratories, discussion after demonstrations, and family's belief that science is a series of courses to pass. This study is a unique and noteworthy addition to the literature. The results paint a dynamic picture of the factors from high school physics and within the affective domain that influence students' future physics performance. The implication is that there are many aspects to the teaching of physics in high school that, although widely used and thought to be effective, need reform in their implementation in order to be beneficial to females and males in university.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it