MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088654543 · doi:10.15353/rea.v13i2.1948

Factors that affect Students’ performance in Science: An application using Gini-BMA methodology in PISA 2015 dataset

2021· preprint· en· W3088654543 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Anastasia Dimiski

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economic Analysis · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttendanceAffect (linguistics)Mathematics educationSet (abstract data type)PsychologyComputer scienceEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing theoretical and empirical evidence on the determinants of students’ performance reveals a direct link between pre-primary education and achievement test scores in primary school. Relying on the first-of-its-kind 2015 wave data from the Programme of International Student Assessment (PISA), the present study analyses the associations between students’ performance in science and a broad set of variables, including regressors that proxy pre-primary education. Employing a Gini Regression Bayesian Model Averaging (BMA) approach to account for model uncertainty, it is found that non-attendance in pre-primary education is a robust determinant with a negative impact on students’ performance in science. This result is confirmed both under Gini-BMA and OLS-BMA methodology.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.277 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economic AnalysisSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207