MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294408704 · doi:10.29173/aar134

Identifying the Predictors of Mathematics Anxiety AND Performance in Canada: An Educational Data Mining Approach

2022· article· en· W4294408704 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tarid Wongvorachan, Ashley Clelland, Guher Gorgun, Okan Bulut

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Academic Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical anxietyAnxietyFeelingMathematics educationSet (abstract data type)Domain (mathematical analysis)PsychologyScale (ratio)MathematicsComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last decade, Canadian students have exhibited insubstantial improvements in mathematical scores compared to other countries as indicated by large-scale educational assessments such as the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). In relation to students’ mathematical performance, math anxiety - the feeling of fear or nervousness when performing math-related tasks - was found as an associated factor. However, no previous study has explored math performance and math anxiety, specifically among Albertan students. We present a work-in-progress that identifies significant predictors of math performance and math anxiety among Canadian and Albertan students, using the PISA 2018 and TIMSS 2019 datasets. This study has three phases: first, a list of predictors will be selected from the data set based on existing theories regarding students’ math performance and math anxiety. The initial list of predictors will be presented to domain experts (i.e., math teachers) for refinement based on their practical experience. A predictive model for math performance and math anxiety will be developed with Educational Data Mining techniques in the second phase. Results from the model will be presented to the domain experts for their inputs as the qualitative component, and variable importance metrics of the model will be consulted for the quantitative component. Findings from both components will be integrated consulted with the domain experts to derive actionable recommendations that would inform various stakeholders (e.g., educators, school districts, and Alberta Education) of ways to improve math performance in Alberta 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.254 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Academic ReviewSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207