拉各斯州立大学大学入学考试与大学后入学考试录取模式的比较分析

Benjamin S. Aribisala, Olanrewaju Abayomi Dosunmu, M. A. Akanbi, Ismail Olanrewaju Shittu
{"title":"拉各斯州立大学大学入学考试与大学后入学考试录取模式的比较分析","authors":"Benjamin S. Aribisala, Olanrewaju Abayomi Dosunmu, M. A. Akanbi, Ismail Olanrewaju Shittu","doi":"10.4314/ejst.v11i2.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There have been issues about the predictive power of the University Matriculation Examination (UME) and most Nigerian universities now conduct an additional screening examination called the post-UME. Some have reported that post-UME is a better predictor of students’ performances than the UME while others have the contrary. Hence, it is still not clear whether post-UME is better than UME. To examine this issue further, the researchers modelled association between entrance exam and academic performance measured by Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) of 381 students who were admitted to eight undergraduate programmes at Lagos State University. Regression analysis showed that UME (standardized β: first year = -0.06, p = 0.214; final year = -0.06, p = 0.217) and General Certificate Ordinary Level, O/L (β: first year = 0.03, p =0.591; final year = 0.02, p = 0.727) were not significantly related to CGPA. However post-UME was significantly associated with CGPA (β: first year = 0.36, p < 0.001; final year = 0.37, p<0.001). Post-UME explained 12.75% and 13.58% variations in the first and final year CGPA respectively. The model that included both post-UME and O/L in the same model showed that they jointly explained 13.07% and 13.81% variations in the first and final year performances respectively Similar results were obtained when UME was added to the model. It was found that post-UME is a better predictor of students’ performances than UME, and the combined O/L and post-UME is no different from the combined O/L, UME and post-UME or post-UME only. The results suggest  that admission criteria should be based largely on post-UME.","PeriodicalId":151905,"journal":{"name":"Ethiopian Journal of Science and Technology","volume":"124 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative analysis of university matriculation examination and post university matriculation examination admission models in Lagos State University\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin S. Aribisala, Olanrewaju Abayomi Dosunmu, M. A. Akanbi, Ismail Olanrewaju Shittu\",\"doi\":\"10.4314/ejst.v11i2.4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There have been issues about the predictive power of the University Matriculation Examination (UME) and most Nigerian universities now conduct an additional screening examination called the post-UME. Some have reported that post-UME is a better predictor of students’ performances than the UME while others have the contrary. Hence, it is still not clear whether post-UME is better than UME. To examine this issue further, the researchers modelled association between entrance exam and academic performance measured by Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) of 381 students who were admitted to eight undergraduate programmes at Lagos State University. Regression analysis showed that UME (standardized β: first year = -0.06, p = 0.214; final year = -0.06, p = 0.217) and General Certificate Ordinary Level, O/L (β: first year = 0.03, p =0.591; final year = 0.02, p = 0.727) were not significantly related to CGPA. However post-UME was significantly associated with CGPA (β: first year = 0.36, p < 0.001; final year = 0.37, p<0.001). Post-UME explained 12.75% and 13.58% variations in the first and final year CGPA respectively. The model that included both post-UME and O/L in the same model showed that they jointly explained 13.07% and 13.81% variations in the first and final year performances respectively Similar results were obtained when UME was added to the model. It was found that post-UME is a better predictor of students’ performances than UME, and the combined O/L and post-UME is no different from the combined O/L, UME and post-UME or post-UME only. The results suggest  that admission criteria should be based largely on post-UME.\",\"PeriodicalId\":151905,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethiopian Journal of Science and Technology\",\"volume\":\"124 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethiopian Journal of Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4314/ejst.v11i2.4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethiopian Journal of Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/ejst.v11i2.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

大学入学考试(UME)的预测能力一直存在问题,大多数尼日利亚大学现在都进行了一项额外的筛选考试,称为UME后。一些人报告说,与大学教育相比,大学教育后能更好地预测学生的表现,而另一些人则相反。因此,UME后是否优于UME尚不清楚。为了进一步研究这个问题,研究人员对拉各斯州立大学8个本科项目的381名学生的入学考试和学习成绩之间的关系进行了建模,这些学生用累积平均成绩(CGPA)来衡量。回归分析显示,UME(标准化β:第一年= -0.06,p = 0.214;最后一年= -0.06,p = 0.217)和普通证书水平,O/L (β:第一年= 0.03,p =0.591;最后一年= 0.02,p = 0.727)与CGPA无显著相关。然而,ume后与CGPA显著相关(β:第一年= 0.36,p < 0.001;最后一年= 0.37,p<0.001)。高考后第一年和最后一年的CGPA差异分别为12.75%和13.58%。将后UME和O/L同时纳入同一模型的模型显示,它们共同解释了第一年和最后一年业绩的13.07%和13.81%的变化,当加入UME时,得到了类似的结果。研究发现,与UME相比,UME后能更好地预测学生的学习成绩,并且合并O/L和UME后与合并O/L、UME和UME后或仅合并UME后没有区别。结果表明,录取标准应主要基于ume后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative analysis of university matriculation examination and post university matriculation examination admission models in Lagos State University
There have been issues about the predictive power of the University Matriculation Examination (UME) and most Nigerian universities now conduct an additional screening examination called the post-UME. Some have reported that post-UME is a better predictor of students’ performances than the UME while others have the contrary. Hence, it is still not clear whether post-UME is better than UME. To examine this issue further, the researchers modelled association between entrance exam and academic performance measured by Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) of 381 students who were admitted to eight undergraduate programmes at Lagos State University. Regression analysis showed that UME (standardized β: first year = -0.06, p = 0.214; final year = -0.06, p = 0.217) and General Certificate Ordinary Level, O/L (β: first year = 0.03, p =0.591; final year = 0.02, p = 0.727) were not significantly related to CGPA. However post-UME was significantly associated with CGPA (β: first year = 0.36, p < 0.001; final year = 0.37, p<0.001). Post-UME explained 12.75% and 13.58% variations in the first and final year CGPA respectively. The model that included both post-UME and O/L in the same model showed that they jointly explained 13.07% and 13.81% variations in the first and final year performances respectively Similar results were obtained when UME was added to the model. It was found that post-UME is a better predictor of students’ performances than UME, and the combined O/L and post-UME is no different from the combined O/L, UME and post-UME or post-UME only. The results suggest  that admission criteria should be based largely on post-UME.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信