Attendance
I ran a linear regression to examine the relationship between overall course performance and attendance in MS 150 Statistics, SC/SS 115 Ethnobotany, and SC 130 Physical Science. In the following chart, the number of absences is plotted against the overall course percentage for that particular student.
MS 150 showed the strongest correlation between absences (and thus attendance) and the overall percentage performance in the course with a correlation coefficient R of -0.77. The negative sign indicates that the larger the absences, the lower the performance in the course. The correlation for MS 150 is strong. Bear in mind that correlation is not causation. Attendance, however, may be a strong factor in student performance.
SC/SS 115 had a correlation coefficient of -0.54. This is a moderate negative correlation. Attendance remained important, but less so compared to MS 150.
SC 130 had the lowest correlation coefficient of -0.41. While this is still considered moderate correlation, other factors are likely a larger part of the performance picture. In the case of SC 130 the large number of points concentrated in the laboratories and the laboratory reports is potentially a source of the decoupling of attendance and performance. Attendance is dominated by MWF attendance, but course performance consists of a majority of points from the laboratories which occur only one day a week. Thus absences MWF would not have as strong an impact as a Thursday (lab day) absence. Students appeared to be aware of this and absences were concentrated in the lower impact MWF classes.
Learning assessment reports are also on line for MS 150 Statistics, SC/SS 115 Ethnobotany, and SC 130 Physical Science.
MS 150 showed the strongest correlation between absences (and thus attendance) and the overall percentage performance in the course with a correlation coefficient R of -0.77. The negative sign indicates that the larger the absences, the lower the performance in the course. The correlation for MS 150 is strong. Bear in mind that correlation is not causation. Attendance, however, may be a strong factor in student performance.
SC/SS 115 had a correlation coefficient of -0.54. This is a moderate negative correlation. Attendance remained important, but less so compared to MS 150.
SC 130 had the lowest correlation coefficient of -0.41. While this is still considered moderate correlation, other factors are likely a larger part of the performance picture. In the case of SC 130 the large number of points concentrated in the laboratories and the laboratory reports is potentially a source of the decoupling of attendance and performance. Attendance is dominated by MWF attendance, but course performance consists of a majority of points from the laboratories which occur only one day a week. Thus absences MWF would not have as strong an impact as a Thursday (lab day) absence. Students appeared to be aware of this and absences were concentrated in the lower impact MWF classes.
Learning assessment reports are also on line for MS 150 Statistics, SC/SS 115 Ethnobotany, and SC 130 Physical Science.
Comments
Post a Comment