Socio-economic Factors Influencing Grade 12 Accounting Learners’ Performance in the Eswatini General Certificate Secondary Examination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the influence of socio-economic factors on Grade 12 Accounting learners’ performance in the Eswatini Accounting General Certificate Secondary Examination (GCSE). An explanatory sequential, mixed-methods design was used. For the quantitative component of the study stratified random sampling was used to obtain a sample of 400 Accounting learners and 80 Accounting teachers. Questionnaires were used to collected quantitative data, which was analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 27. Purposive sampling was used to select 12 Accounting learners and 8 Accounting teachers for the qualitative component. Interviews were used to generate quantitative data which was analysed thematically. The study found that socio-economic factors that negatively influenced learners’ performance in Grade 12 Accounting GCSE in Eswatini included parents’ lack of interest and involvement in their children’s learning, as well as the family’s socio-economic status (income and background), with poverty and overcrowded living conditions playing a role. The study raises awareness of the socio-economic factors that are likely to influence learners’ academic performance in Grade 12 Accounting in emerging economies. To mitigate these factors, the researchers recommend that parents or guardians allocate a regular time and dedicated space at home for their child to do their homework and discuss their child’s progress regularly with their child’s teacher as strategies to support their child’s learning.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".