Investigating factors affecting secondary school non-achievers in mathematics before and after the pandemic

Year 2023, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 67 - 76, 30.12.2023

Stylıanos Tsakirtzis Ioannis Georgakopoulos Chrıstos Tsıfakıs

Abstract

Acquiring knowledge in Mathematics is crucial as it serves as a fundamental component for a successful academic journey. However, numerous students encounter formidable challenges, leading to unsuccessful outcomes in their Mathematical courses. Therefore, identifying secondary school non-achievers in Mathematics is paramount. This necessity was accentuated during the pandemic. Any physical school operation was shut down during this period, leading to an increase in non-achievers. To identify non-achievers before and after the pandemic, we constructed two relevant risk models using a binary logistic regression analysis of student engagement data. The models were applied to a particular Mathematical course taught at a Greek Gymnasium. The findings proved that participation in the prescribed written tests was the main factor that affected the performance of non-achievers before the pandemic. Similarly, the risk model developed after the pandemic indicated that the same factor continued to determine student final achievement. However, the positive effect of the same factors (after the pandemic) reducing the probability of students’ failure was slightly increased.

Keywords

risk factors, risk model, pandemic, students’ engagement, math education

Supporting Institution

University of West Attica

References

• Agresti, A. (2015). Foundations of linear and generalized linear models. John Wiley & Sons.
• Allison, P. D. (2014, March). Measures of fit for logistic regression. In Proceedings of the SAS global forum 2014 conference (pp. 1-13). Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute Inc.
• Anagnostopoulos, T., Kytagias, C., Xanthopoulos, T., Georgakopoulos, I., Salmon, I., & Psaromiligkos, Y. (2020). Intelligent predictive analytics for identifying students at risk of failure in Moodle courses. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 16th International Conference, ITS 2020, Athens, Greece, June 8–12, 2020, Proceedings 16 (pp. 152-162). Springer International Publishing.
• Casillas, A., Robbins, S., Allen, J., Kuo, Y. L., Hanson, M. A., & Schmeiser, C. (2012). Predicting early academic failure in high school from prior academic achievement, psychosocial characteristics, and behavior. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), 407.
• Cox, D. R., & Snell, E. J. (1989). Analysis of binary data (Vol. 32). CRC press.
• Flores, M. M., & Kaylor, M. (2007). The Effects of a Direct Instruction Program on the Fraction Performance of Middle School Students At-risk for Failure in Mathematics. Journal of instructional psychology, 34(2).
• Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59-109.
• Georgakopoulos, I., Kytagias, C., Psaromiligkos, Y., & Voudouri, A. (2018). Identifying risks factors of students' failure in e-learning systems: towards a warning system. International Journal of Decision Support Systems, 3(3-4), 190-206.
• Georgakopoulos, I., Chalikias, M., Zakopoulos, V., & Kossieri, E. (2020). Identifying factors of students’ failure in blended courses by analyzing students’ engagement data. Education Sciences, 10(9), 242.
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Uppersaddle River. Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed) Upper Saddle River, 5(3), 207-219.
• Hemmings B., Grootenboer P., Kay R. (2011). International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 691-705.
• Hopf, D., & Xochellis, P. (2003). Gymnasium and Lyceum in Greece. Athens: Greek Letters (in Greek).
• Hosmer Jr, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. X. (2013). Applied logistic regression (Vol. 398). John Wiley & Sons.
• Hosmer, D. W., & Lemesbow, S. (1980). Goodness of fit tests for the multiple logistic regression model. Communications in statistics-Theory and Methods, 9(10), 1043-1069.
• Kajander, A., Zuke, C., & Walton, G. (2008). Teaching unheard voices: students at-risk in mathematics. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(4), 1039-1064.
• Macfadyen, L. P., & Dawson, S. (2010). Mining LMS data to develop an “early warning system” for educators: A proof of concept. Computers & education, 54(2), 588-599.
• Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. American educational research journal, 37(1), 153-184.
• McConney, A., & Perry, L. B. (2010). Socioeconomic status, self-efficacy, and mathematics achievement in Australia: A secondary analysis. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 9, 77-91.
• Nagelkerke, N. J. (1991). A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. biometrika, 78(3), 691-692.
• Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., Guàrdia, L., & Koole, M. (2021). Balancing technology, pedagogy and the new normal: Post-pandemic challenges for higher education. Postdigital Science and Education, 3(3), 715-742.
• Sciarra, D. T., & Seirup, H. J. (2008). The multidimensionality of school engagement and math achievement among racial groups. Professional School Counseling, 11(4), 2156759X0801100402.
• Smith, B. J., & Lim, M. H. (2020). How the COVID-19 pandemic is focusing attention on loneliness and social isolation. Public Health Res Pract, 30(2), 3022008.
• Smith, T. J., & McKenna, C. M. (2013). A comparison of logistic regression pseudo R2 indices. Multiple Linear Regression Viewpoints, 39(2), 17-26.
• Sullivan, P., Cheeseman, J., Michels, D., Mornane, A., Clarke, D., Roche, A., & Middleton, J. (2011). Challenging mathematics tasks: What they are and how to use them. Maths is multi-dimensional, 33-46.
• Vose, D. (2008). Risk analysis: a quantitative guide. John Wiley & Sons.
• Willms, J. D. (2003). Student engagement at school. A sense of belonging and participation. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1-84.
• Xin, Y. P., Jitendra, A. K., & Deatline-Buchman, A. (2005). Effects of mathematical word Problem—Solving instruction on middle school students with learning problems. The Journal of Special Education, 39(3), 181-192.
• Yurt, E. (2014). The predictive power of self-efficacy sources for mathematics achievement. Eğitim ve Bilim-Education and Science, 39(176), 159-169.