Search

The paper estimates the effect of students’ position in the classroom register on their academic performance. We use a unique dataset from Poland which contains information on the academic outcomes of students in the humanities, science and mathematics lower secondary school exams as well as the position students occupy in their classroom register. We find that students whose names are recorded near the end of the class list have lower performance than those students whose names are recorded near the beginning of the list. The effect appears to be larger for performance in the humanities exam, and for low-achieving boys who attend large classes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a critical analysis of data analysis requirements in physics tertiary entrance examinations. The setting is Western Australia. Common aspects of the questions asked over 14 years and changes in the questions since a major syllabus reform are identified. Similar changes in other jurisdictions are referenced. The data analysis questions reflect minimally the changes in emphasis in the reform syllabus. They imply science is unassailable laws and not science is inquiry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has long been established that marking accuracy in public examinations varies considerably among subjects and markers. This is unsurprising, given the diverse cognitive strategies that the marking process can entail, but what makes some questions harder to mark accurately than others? Are there distinct but subtle features of questions and their mark schemes that can affect accuracy? Such features could potentially contribute to a broad rationale for designating questions to markers according to personal expertise. The aim of this study was to identify question features that can distinguish those questions that are marked highly accurately from those that are marked less accurately. The study comprised an exploration of maths and physics questions from past GCSE examinations, which were marked in an experimental setting by groups of markers and yielded differing marking accuracies. The questions also varied in their difficulty for GCSE candidates, and in the cognitive strategies needed to mark them. Kelly's Repertory Grid technique and semi-structured interview schedules were used in meetings with highly experienced principal examiners, who had led the experimental marking of the questions. The data generated comprised ratings for each question on a number of question features (constructs). The ratings were analysed together with the marking accuracy data, enabling an investigation of possible relationships between each question feature and (i) marking accuracy, (ii) question difficulty for the candidate, and (iii) apparent cognitive marking strategy usage. For both subjects, marking accuracy was found to be related to various subject-specific question features, some of which were also related to question difficulty (for the candidate) and/or apparent marking strategy complexity. For both maths and physics, several other subject-specific question features were found to be unrelated to accuracy. Overall, the findings have potential implications for the management of markers and for question design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For students, cognitive and motivational-affective characteristics are the most powerful prerequisites for successful learning. For teachers, judgments on their students’ characteristics shape how they plan and implement instructional activities in order to offer individual learning support. On the student side, research is starting to find out more about the interplay of different characteristics within individual students. On the teacher side, studies still regard teacher judgment accuracy of only single characteristics. By taking a person-centered approach, regarding NS = 503 students and their NT = 41 mathematics and languages arts teachers, our manuscript joined teacher and student perspectives on student characteristics interplay and suggests methodology to compare them. We found that student assessments suggested ample diversity regarding this interplay–and teachers did not perceive this. In their views, “homogeneous” sets of average characteristics were dominant. Findings suggest addressing students’ views and the diagnosis of their characteristics in teacher education to enable individual support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]