Survey Of Maritime Student Satisfaction: A Case Study On The International Student Survey To Identify The Satisfaction Of Students In Mathematical Courses
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
This study presents the analyses of students’ preferences, satisfaction and perception of learning mathematical subjects at higher education maritime institutions in Croatia, Latvia, Estonia and Poland. All these institutions participate as project partners in the MareMathics project. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of teaching and learning mathematics, a preliminary student survey was conducted in all project partner institutions. Two indicators were analyzed: exam success rate and learning outcomes achieved. The developed online questionnaire contained a number of questions about the teaching methods and tools used by lecturers. Students assessed the impact of different teaching methods, expressed their satisfaction with learning materials, their impact on the results achieved by them, and the overall course. The analysis of the obtained data revealed that students faced difficulties in completing their tasks within subjects on mathematics and statistics. These research results lead to the conclusion that the used methods and tools of teaching mathematics and statistics, which are the essential influential factors on the overall satisfaction of students, are not effective and need to be modernized in the institutions under consideration. And this fact is crucial in the process of study and teaching of mathematical subjects as those subjects make up the base and necessary tools in learning other courses contained in the study program, especially in technical and engineering studies.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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