[LON-CAPA-cvs] cvs: modules /gerd/discussions studeval.pl /gerd/discussions/paper discussions.tex

[www]

www		Thu Apr 14 16:10:29 2005 EDT

  Modified files:              
    /modules/gerd/discussions	studeval.pl 
    /modules/gerd/discussions/paper	discussions.tex 
  Log:
  Further work on paper.
  
  
Index: modules/gerd/discussions/studeval.pl
diff -u modules/gerd/discussions/studeval.pl:1.5 modules/gerd/discussions/studeval.pl:1.6
--- modules/gerd/discussions/studeval.pl:1.5	Wed Apr 13 17:51:43 2005
+++ modules/gerd/discussions/studeval.pl	Thu Apr 14 16:10:28 2005
@@ -102,6 +102,13 @@
 	&callsums('procedural&grade'.$entries[$grade],$error,@entries);
 	&callsums('solution&grade'.$entries[$grade],$error,@entries);
 #
+	&callsums('emotion&gradegender'.$entries[$gender].$entries[$grade],$error,@entries);
+	&callsums('conceptual&gradegender'.$entries[$gender].$entries[$grade],$error,@entries);
+	&callsums('physics&gradegender'.$entries[$gender].$entries[$grade],$error,@entries);
+	&callsums('math&gradegender'.$entries[$gender].$entries[$grade],$error,@entries);
+	&callsums('procedural&gradegender'.$entries[$gender].$entries[$grade],$error,@entries);
+	&callsums('solution&gradegender'.$entries[$gender].$entries[$grade],$error,@entries);
+#
 	&callsums('emotion&gender'.$entries[$gender],$error,@entries);
 	&callsums('conceptual&gender'.$entries[$gender],$error,@entries);
 	&callsums('physics&gender'.$entries[$gender],$error,@entries);
@@ -165,6 +172,26 @@
                       &reportout('physics&gender'.$i).',',
                       &reportout('conceptual&gender'.$i);
 }
+print "\n==Male";
+for (my $i=0;$i<=4;$i+=.5) {
+    print "\n".&padded($i).','.
+                      &reportout('emotion&gradegenderm'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('procedural&gradegenderm'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('solution&gradegenderm'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('math&gradegenderm'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('physics&gradegenderm'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('conceptual&gradegenderm'.$i);
+}
+print "\n==Female";
+for (my $i=0;$i<=4;$i+=.5) {
+    print "\n".&padded($i).','.
+                      &reportout('emotion&gradegenderf'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('procedural&gradegenderf'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('solution&gradegenderf'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('math&gradegenderf'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('physics&gradegenderf'.$i).',',
+                      &reportout('conceptual&gradegenderf'.$i);
+}
 print "\n";
 
 
Index: modules/gerd/discussions/paper/discussions.tex
diff -u modules/gerd/discussions/paper/discussions.tex:1.10 modules/gerd/discussions/paper/discussions.tex:1.11
--- modules/gerd/discussions/paper/discussions.tex:1.10	Wed Apr 13 17:51:43 2005
+++ modules/gerd/discussions/paper/discussions.tex	Thu Apr 14 16:10:28 2005
@@ -262,17 +262,42 @@
 \item[Type and feature sums] - number of all related contributions belonging to a certain type, subtype, or feature.
 \end{description}  
 \section{Results of Analysis by Student}
+\subsection{Participation}
+\begin{figure*}
+\includegraphics[width=160mm]{contribBinned}% Here is how to import EPS art
+\caption{\label{fig:contribBinned}Number of students versus number of discussion contributions.}
+\end{figure*}
 Within the first semester calculus-based course, an analysis by student was performed. Out of the 211 students in the course,
-138 students (65 percent) contributed at least one discussion posting over the course of the semester. 
-It is not possible to find out which percentage students {\it read} the discussions, since they are automatically attached to the questions.
+138 students (65 percent) contributed at least one discussion posting over the course of the semester. Figure~\ref{fig:contribBinned} shows the distribution
+of number of discussion contributions over the course of the semester. Most students who participated made between one and ten contributions, but one student made
+66 postings.
+It is not possible to find out which percentage students {\it read} the discussions, since discussion are automatically attached to the questions and always visible.
 The average number of postings per student was $5\pm0.7$. Women had a significantly higher average number of postings than men:
 each female student contributed an average of $5.9\pm1$ postings, while each male student contributed an average of $3.7\pm0.7$ postings.
-
+\subsection{Grade-Dependence of Discussion Contributions\label{subsec:gradedep}} 
 The average grade in the course was $3.21\pm0.05$, with men and women achieving equally high grades (men: $3.29\pm0.08$; women: $3.17\pm0.05$). 
 No correlation could be found between the average number of discussion postings and the grade in the course --- in terms of absolute 
 numbers, within statistical errors, students with high and low grades in the course participated equally in the discussions.
+\begin{figure}
+\includegraphics[width=86mm]{gradecorrel}% Here is how to import EPS art
+\caption{\label{fig:gradecorrel}Prominance of discussion superclasses by grade.}
+\end{figure}
+Significant differences as a function of course grade appear when considering the classes of discussions (subsection~\ref{subsec:disccat}). 
+In this analysis, the percentage prominance of certain types and 
+features in students' cummulative contributions over the semester was analyzed. The individual percentage (relative) prominances were then averaged by grade. 
+Note that the outcome is independent of the absolute number of postings a student made, e.g., the discussion behaviour of the student who made 66 contributions is weighed 
+equally to that of a student having made only the average 5 contributions. Figure~\ref{fig:gradecorrel}
+shows the outcome of this study by discussion superclass. As an example, the figure is to be interpreted this way: within the indicated errors, 
+55 percent of a 3.0 student's discussion contributions were solution-oriented. The lines represent second-order polynomial fits to the data.
+
+The relative prominance of solution-oriented discussion contributions varies most strongly with grade, from 75 percent for a 2.0 student to 45 percent for a 4.0 student.
+The relative prominance of physics-related and conceptual discussion contributions on the other hand increases with grade.
+The relative prominance of procedural discussions does not vary significantly with grades and is consistent with 42 percent promimance across grades and gender, except for the 23 female 4.0 students, where it is $68\pm7$ percent --- the 22 male 4.0 students, by comparison, average $34\pm8$ percent procedural discussions.
+
+Except for the exceptionally high prominance of procedural discussion among the best female students, the results are not surprising, but verify the validity
+of the classification approach.
+
 
-Significant differences appear when considering the classes of discussions.
   
 \section{Results of Analysis by Question}
 \subsection{Influence of Question Difficulty}