Tools
Sorted by:
Try your query at:
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Results 1 - 10
of
3,120
Table 1. Fall Semester: Student- and Teacher-Initiated Threads by Category of Content Fall Semester
Table 4. Regression of pre-pharmacy SMGPA, PCAT Composite, and Campus Attended Prediction of Fall Semester and First Academic Year Cumulative College of Pharmacy Grade Point Average Fall Semester Cumulative GPA
2003
Table 3: Average Grade Received by All CEAS Students in ECE 100, Fall Semester.
"... In PAGE 3: ... One of the goals of the MEP SBP is to provide support and to prepare students for success in the traditional gate- keeping courses such as ECE 100: Introduction to Engineering Design . The Program has demonstrated that this does in fact occur as shown in Table3 [8]. The comparison of the average grade received in ECE 100 by those students who took the course in their first semester is shown below.... ..."
Table 4. Characteristics of three MSU courses which used LON-CAPA in fall semester 2003
2004
"... In PAGE 6: ...2. Data sets For this paper we selected three data sets from the LON-CAPA courses as shown in Table4 . For example the second row of the table shows that BS111 (Biological Science: Cells and Molecules) integrated 235 online homework problems, and 382 students used LON-CAPA for this course.... ..."
Cited by 5
Table 1: Electrical Engineering Electives at Trinity Semester Fall Spring
"... In PAGE 2: ... This contrasts to a traditional electrical or computer engineering program, where this same topical coverage would be handled in more depth in two or even three semesters. Electrical engineering electives are shown below in Table1 . Other than Applied Signals amp; Systems, no elective course requires other electives as prerequisites.... ..."
Table 2 gives the faculty totals from data provided by Institutional Research. TABLE 2 Total Number of Faculty (Fall Semester)
2002
"... In PAGE 86: ... Graduate courses outside the Department of Mathematical Sciences can be included, if they contribute to a meaningful doctoral program for the student. In addition to the courses listed in Table2... ..."
Table 2. Project Scores for the Fall 01 semester PairedPairedSoloSolo
"... In PAGE 4: ...52, p lt;0.0367) with the pairs performing better on both of them ( Table2 ). However this demonstrated improved performance does not occur in Project 3.... ..."
Table 2: Examination Scores Fall 2001
"... In PAGE 3: ... 4.2 Performance on Examinations In the fall semester, students in the paired section performed better on the two-midterm examinations and the final examination, as shown in Table2 . We removed 0 scores from our analysis, making these results based on scores of students who attempted to take the exam.... ..."
Table 1. Success Rate/Retention SemesterSectionNumberC and aboveBelow CSuccess Rate Fall 01Paired44 30 14 68.18%
"... In PAGE 3: ... We also only chose students who took the course for a grade, concluding that students who audited the class or took it for credit only had different motivations than other students. Table1 reflects the number of students who were part of the analysis. Table 1.... In PAGE 3: ...uccess rate (ChiSq(1) = 7.292, p lt; 0.007) with 85% of the paired students receiving a C or better while only 65% of the solo students did. Table1 summarizes the results of the success/retention rate of students in the class across the semesters. Midterm and final exam scores were also examined between the paired and solo sections for all three semesters.... ..."
Table 1: Course Schedule for Spring and Fall 2000
"... In PAGE 4: ... Students from the ENGR3293 engineering statistics course at the University of Oklahoma were evaluated over two semesters: Spring 2000 and Fall 2000. Course schedules were similar for the spring and fall courses ( Table1 ). The fall semester, however, included computerized statistics modules.... In PAGE 19: ... Overall, cognitive competence was the best received, while difficulty was least received. Table1 0: Affect Between Semesters Spring (No Module) Fall (Module) Difference P-value Pre-semester Survey 4.46 4.... In PAGE 19: ...25 0.12 Table1 1: Cognitive Competence Between Semesters Spring (No Module) Fall (Module) Difference P-value Pre-semester Survey 5.15 5.... In PAGE 19: ...08 0.61 Table1 2: Value Between Semesters Spring (No Module) Fall (Module) Difference P-value Pre-semester Survey 5.20 5.... In PAGE 19: ...53 0.00001 Table1 3: Difficulty Between Semesters Spring (No Module) Fall (Module) Difference P-value Pre-semester Survey 3.70 3.... In PAGE 20: ... The student attitude toward value decreased. Table1 4: Affect Within Semester Pre Post Difference P-value Spring (No Module) 4.46 4.... In PAGE 20: ...19 0.13 Table1 5: Cognitive Competence Within Semester Pre Post Difference P-value Spring (No Module) 5.15 5.... In PAGE 20: ...17 0.21 Table1 6: Value Within Semester Pre Post Difference P-value Spring (No Module) 5.20 5.... In PAGE 20: ...49 0.000005 Table1 7: Difficulty Within Semester Pre Post Difference P-value Spring (No Module) 3.70 3.... ..."
Results 1 - 10
of
3,120
