Bibliographic record
Abstract
Baccalaureate nursing education strives toward comprehensive preparation of diverse nursing students to meet current healthcare workforce demands. Identification of factors that predict academic success is imperative to meet this goal. The purpose of this study was to discover whether specific academic and noncognitive variables predicted baccalaureate nursing students’ academic success, as defined by junior-year grade point average (GPA) and persistence in nursing education. This post-facto correlational study was conducted over two semesters. Junior year nursing students (N = 150) answered the Short Grit Survey and the Noncognitive Questionnaire, and their academic records were examined for previous college grades (GPAs) and SAT scores. Demographic groups were compared using t-tests, and the data were regressed on junior-year student GPAs and persistence in the major to determine predictors of success. Several significant differences between the participant group responses were noted. Only early-college GPAs predicted junior-year success. SAT scores, grit and noncognitive factors, as well as demographic variables, did not predict academic success. These results inform baccalaureate education programs about priorities for admitting and advising students, and support the use of early-college GPAs to predict the academic success of junior-year baccalaureate nursing 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".