variables that will positively predict outcomes. In other words, it aims to use knowledge about correlations to predict future events based on the correlations observed. An important to note in correlational research is that correlation does not imply causation i.e. an observation of a low correlation between two variables does not imply that because the first variable had a low value leads to the second variable also having a low value. Indeed a simultaneous change in both variables may have been caused by a third variable. As this is the first year that PBL tutorials have been implemented into the Foundation Mathematics module we concentrated solely on an explanatory design for the correlation analysis since we did not have sufficient data to carry out a prediction design. In this correlation, the variable with the PBL component’ was a mark out ‘interaction of 100% and was calculated using the variables attendance at PBL tutorials, submission of diary entries outlining student thoughts on the process, submission of peer evaluations on group members for the PBL tutorials and participation in a group presentation. The variable of module exam’ was again a mark out of 100% and was the grade achieved by ‘End students on the Foundation Mathematics exam paper which was taken by all students in the group at the end of the module. This was a 2-hour exam paper containing 4 questions. Students were expected to attempt all questions. The Foundation Mathematics module was assessed using a continuous assessment component which was worth 30% of the overall mark and an end of module exam which was worth 70% of the overall mark. Furthermore, the continuous assessment mark was further broken down as follows: Mid-Term Assessment: A 1-hour written test to students during Week 8 of the semester. This assessment was worth 20% of the overall module mark. PBL Tutorials: As outlined above, there were 4 parts to the allocated mark for the PBL tutorials as follows: Attendance at PBL tutorials = 3% Submission of diary entries = 1.5% Submission of peer evaluations = 1.5% Group presentation = 4%
variables that will positively predict outcomes. In other words, it aims to use knowledge about correlations to predict future events based on the correlations observed. An important to note in correlational research is that correlation does not imply causation i.e. an observation of a low correlation between two variables does not imply that because the first variable had a low value leads to the second variable also having a low value. Indeed a simultaneous change in both variables may have been caused by a third variable. As this is the first year that PBL tutorials have been implemented into the Foundation Mathematics module we concentrated solely on an explanatory design for the correlation analysis since we did not have sufficient data to carry out a prediction design. In this correlation, the variable ‘interaction with the PBL component’ was a mark out of 100% and was calculated using the variables attendance at PBL tutorials, submission of diary entries outlining student thoughts on the process, submission of peer evaluations on group members for the PBL tutorials and participation in a group presentation. The variable ‘End of module exam’ was again a mark out of 100% and was the grade achieved by students on the Foundation Mathematics exam paper which was taken by all students in the group at the end of the module. This was a 2-hour exam paper containing 4 questions. Students were expected to attempt all questions. The Foundation Mathematics module was assessed using a continuous assessment component which was worth 30% of the overall mark and an end of module exam which was worth 70% of the overall mark. Furthermore, the continuous assessment mark was further broken down as follows: Mid-Term Assessment: A 1-hour written test to students during Week 8 of the semester. This assessment was worth 20% of the overall module mark. PBL Tutorials: As outlined above, there were 4 parts to the allocated mark for the PBL tutorials as follows: Attendance at PBL tutorials = 3% Submission of diary entries = 1.5% Submission of peer evaluations = 1.5% Group presentation = 4%
EdD%20Thesis1.docx