The survey continues with similar efforts in previous semesters, and a total of 398 students submitted responses. Module Design and Workload used to be two distinct surveys, but with the newly added “Effects of Learning through Peer Discussions” data study, I’ve rolled some of what used to be in the Workload survey into the Module Design survey; the rest are in the data study.
This post is not just for you, but also a way for me to organize my own thinking. Feel free to send me further comments by email or come talk to me directly. Comparisons are always with runs of the module in the past under me (rather than any other instructor). I’ll start with the quantitatives (data taken as of 10:30AM 20 November)…
I’m in the process of collating your peer review for the Special Project. The overall impression reading the comments on group dynamics is that most students had a positive experience with the group–in some cases, even a very positive experience. I won’t have time to post extensive analysis of the qualitative comments but the attached wordcloud for Question 4 (“Any further general comments about your project group”) created using https://www.wordclouds.com/ gives you a sense of the overall situation. (Click on the graphics to see a larger version.)
Below are my preliminary analysis of the quantitative returns, dated as of evening of 11 November.
Suppose students randomly assign answers for the weekly quizzes–what kind of scores will they receive? Wonder no more–the graph is attached. The mean and median score would be a 2 (upon 8). This tells me a few things. First, students need to do better than random just to get at least 3 upon 8, and a lot better than random to get 6-8 marks. Historically, the mean score for the weekly quizzes (the average of the weekly averages) is around 5.8, and the median is usually 6, this means that students are doing significantly better than random–it assures me that most of you are actually understanding most of the concepts and making careful and strict inferences from them (as that’s what the questions ultimately test for). Either that or most of you found good people to emulate. (That’s an inclusive “or”, of course.)
Just to complete the picture–what would happen if all the students assign their answers randomly? I would expect that for each quiz, our class of 448 students will return around 45 students with 0 marks, 120 with 1 mark, 140 with 2 marks, 93 with 3 marks, 39 with 4 marks, 10 with 5 marks, and 2 with 6 marks, and none with 7 or 8 marks. So, yeah–you are definitely doing a lot better than random as a cohort.
Nonetheless, this project video is still epic:
Subscribe by Email
Completely spam free, opt out any time.
Please, insert a valid email.
Thank you, your email will be added to the mailing list once you click on the link in the confirmation email.
Spam protection has stopped this request. Please contact site owner for help.