DIFFERENCES IN RESULTS OBTAINED BY STUDENTS OF DIFFERENT FACULTIES

Authors

  • Miroslava Otavová University of Economics, Prague
  • Irena Sýkorová University of Economics, Prague

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2016.090101

Keywords:

Analysis of variance, weighted least squares, linear regression, test in mathematics

Abstract

The paper presents and discusses the results of statistical analysis of differences among scores obtained by students of different faculties of the University of Economics in Prague. The analysed dataset contains the scores for 2256 students that took basic mathematics course during the academic year 2013/2014. A two way analysis of variance was performed with semester and faculty as main factors. The interaction between these two factors was also considered. Students have to take two tests. At first, the sum of the scores obtained from both tests is analysed and then, the two tests are analysed separately. It turns out that the significance of factors is the same in the three analyses. The assumptions of linear models are verified. Due to problem of heteroscedasticity, weighted least squares are used and the possibility of using Box-Cox transformation is also discussed, as the errors are not normally distributed. Finally, the differences between the faculties are described.

References

  • Boháčková, I., Brožová, I. (2012) ‘Assessing Students´ Level of Knowledge in Profile Courses of Choosen Economic Study Programmes at the FEM CULS’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 148-156.

  • Brožová H., Rydval J. (2014) 'Analysis of Exam Results of the Subject ´Applied Mathematics for IT´', Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 7, no. 3-4, pp. 59-65.

  • Clotfelter, C.T., Ladd, H.F., Vigor, J.L. (2007) ‘How and Why Do Teacher Credentials Matter for Student Achievement?’ , Working Paper, Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Hassanbeigi, A. et al (2011) ‘The relationship between study skills and academic performance of university students’, Procedia Social Behavioral Science, vol. 30, pp. 1416-1424.

  • Kaspříková, N. (2011) ‘Multivariate Analysis of Examination Papers’, Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2011), Prague, pp. 120-127.

  • Kaspříková, N. (2012) ‘Data Analysis of Students’ Performance’, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2012), Prague, pp. 213-218.

  • Kaspříková, N. (2013) ‘Evaluation of the Test within the Latent Variable Models Framework’, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2013), Prague, pp. 264-269.

  • Klůfa, J. (2012) ‘Tests from Probability Point of View’, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2012), Prague, pp. 229-233.

  • Klůfa, J. (2013a) ‘Comparison of Entrance Examinations in Mathematics’, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2013), Prague, pp. 270-275.

  • Klůfa, J. (2013b) Učebnice matematiky pro studenty VŠE, Prague: Ekopress.

  • Klůfa, J., Kaspříková, N. (2013) Mathematics for Economic Universities, Prague: Ekopress.

  • Klůfa J. (2015) ‘Comparison of The Ways of Acceptance Students at University’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 72-76.

  • Kolari, S., Savander-Ranne, C., Viskari E.L. (2008) ‘Learning needs time and effort: a time-use study of engineering students’, European Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 33, no. 01, pp. 483-498.

  • Kučera, P., Svatošová, L., Pelikán, M. (2015) ‘University study results as related to the admission exam results’, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2015), Prague, pp. 318–324.

  • Kutner, M.H., Nachtsheim, C.J., Neter, J., Li.,W. (2005) Applied Linear Statistical Models, 5th Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

  • Otavová, M., Sýkorová, I. (2014) ‘Analysis of Scores from Mid-Term and Final Test by a Contingency Table’, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2014), Prague, pp. 527-533.

  • Otavová, M., Sýkorová, I. (2015) ‘Analysis of Differences in the Scores of Students From Different Faculties’, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2015), Prague, pp. 422-429.

  • Pacáková, Z. (2013) ‘Motivation to Study - Students´ Motivational Response on Various Motivational Actions in Statistical Courses’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 294-307.

  • Sahai, H., Ageel, M.I. (2000) The Analysis of Variance: Fixed, Random and Mixed Models, Boston: Birkhäuser.

  • Sengodan, V., Iksan, Z.H. (2012) ‘Students' learning styles and intrinsic motivation in learning mathematics.’ Asian Social Science, vol. 8, no. 16, pp. 17-23.

  • Venables, W.N., Ripley, B.D. (2002) Modern Applied Statistics with S, 4th Edition, New York: Springer.

    • Additional Files

    Published

    2016-03-31

    How to Cite

    Otavová, M. and Sýkorová, I. (2016) ’DIFFERENCES IN RESULTS OBTAINED BY STUDENTS OF DIFFERENT FACULTIES’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2016.090101

    Issue

    Vol. 9 No. 1 (2016)

    Section

    Research Paper

    License

    Authors declare with this manuscript intended for publication to ERIES Journal that:

    • all co-authors agree with the publication of the manuscript even after amendments arising from peer review;
    • all co-authors agree with the posting of the full text of this work on the web page of ERIES Journal and to the inclusion of references in databases accessible on the internet;
    • no results of other researchers were used in the submitted manuscript without their consent, proper citation, or acknowledgement of their cooperation or material provided;
    • the results (or any part of them) used in the manuscript have not been sent for publication to any other journal nor have they already been published (or if so, that the relevant works are cited in this manuscript);
    • submission of the manuscript for publication was completed in accordance with the publishing regulations pertaining to place of work;
    • experiments performed comply with current laws and written consent of the Scientific Ethics Committee / National Animal Care Authority (as is mentioned in the manuscript submitted);
    • grant holders confirm that they have been informed of the submitted manuscript and they agree to its publication.

    Authors retain copyright and grant ERIES Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the published work with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. Moreover, authors are able to post the published work in an institutional repository with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. In addition, authors are permitted and encouraged to post the published work online (e.g. institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.