Effect of Time Management and Monetary Rewards on Cognitive Task Accomplishment among Students of Nnamdi Azikiwe Secondary School, Awka, Anambra State, Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Good secondary education is critical to higher education and career paths. Many University secondary/high schools have distinguished themselves with good management leading to excellent performance of their students. However, it is worrisome why the performance of some students in such high impacting schools cannot average. In view of this problem, this study explored differences in cognitive task accomplishment as probable part of the causes; and evaluated time management and monetary rewards as factors. The design for the study was non-randomized control group, pre-test, post-test quasi experimental design utilizing analysis of co-variance (ANCOVA) as statistical tool. Purposive and simple random sampling was used to select 90 students from the population of 145 JS2 students of Nnamdi Azikiwe Secondary School, Awka. Three hypotheses guided the study while the Fifteen Puzzle Cognitive Task developed by Chapman (1874) to test for spatial ability in children was adopted as the instrument for engaging the participants in cognitive task ability using two experimental and two control groups. Result indicated that groups with better time management was better in cognitive task accomplishment but monetary reward was not a strong force for better performance in cognitive task accomplishment among secondary school students. The result implies that many of the participants have difficulty solving an academic within the allowed time. It is recommended while emphasizing other aspects of scholarship for improving better performance of students, students need to be trained on time management as to improve the minimum time they take to solve an academic problem both in in-course assessments and during examinations.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".