 |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 9, Issue 1, Article
12 (Jun., 2008) |
| |
Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 9, Issue 1, Article
12 (Jun., 2008) |
Statistical AnalysisSince 2004, the NSTM has been conducting the projects. At first, both the primary test and the final test were written tests. In 2005, the test mode was changed; the primary test kept the same written test pattern, and the final test was changed to merge theory and practical hands-on activities. The descriptive statistics about the final contestants and their primary and final scores are shown in Table 1. In 2005, there was a huge gap between the primary and the final test scores. The difference for the two average test scores almost reached 36(=94.20-58.24), and the reason may be because the testers were not accustomed to the newly changed test pattern.
Table 1: The descriptive statistics of the primary test and final test
Year
Primary test
Final test
Number of contestants
Average score
Standard deviation
Number of contestants
Average score
Standard deviation
2004
226
73.47
8.88
209
60.27
13.96
2005
210
94.20
4.07
210
58.24
11.10
2006
201
77.46
6.94
198
62.75
11.02
2007
203
77.59
8.58
200
57.97
14.05
2004-2007
840
80.60
10.91
817
59.78
12.74
Note 1: The number of primary test contestants is not the original competition attendance number; the number shown is representative of those permitted to join the final test after the primary test was held.
Note 2: Full score is 100.
Table 2: The correlation analysis of various tests between 2004 -2007
Year
Test method
Pearson correlation coefficient (r) for primary and final test scores
p value
Primary
Final
2004
Written
Written
0.36
0.00*
2005
Written
Hands-on
0.09
0.19
2006
Written
Hands-on
0.26
0.00*
2007
Written
Hands-on
0.51
0.00*
* Means p value < 0.05
The correlation analysis between the primary and the final test scores for each year is shown in Table 2. In 2004, the Pearson correlation coefficient between the primary test and the final test is 0.36. Statistical test results showed that there was significant correlation between the two tests. When the test method for the final test was changed to a hands-on approach in 2005, the correlation coefficient among the two tests dropped to 0.09. It appears that the primary test was not significantly linearly correlated with the final test. The reason might be that the testers were not familiar with the newly created tests. Nevertheless, the correlation gradually increases during 2006 and 2007, and the testers may be getting used to the changes.
The one factor ANOVA test about the final scores for different areas where contestants are from is shown in Table 3. The testing results show that from 2004 to 2007, there is no significant difference among the final scores for the different areas; the contestants from different areas seem to have equal ability in such applied mechanics contests.
Table 3: Final score analysis from different regions from 2004 to 2007
Area
Final test
F test
Testers’ number
Average score
Standard deviation
F value
p value
Northern
186
59.56
12.72
0.33
0.80
Taoyuan Hsinchu
115
60.77
13.41
Middle
157
59.29
12.37
Southern
359
59.80
12.73
Total
817
59.78
12.74
The frequency distributions from 2004 to 2007 for various medals and areas where contestants from are shown in Table 4 to Table 7, respectively. Table 8 shows the correlation analysis among the medal types and the areas during the four years. Testing results suggested there was no significant correlation among the medal types and the areas where the contestant was from; the mechanics contest contestants seemed to have an equal ability in obtaining medals no matter where he/she came from.
Table 4: The cross table about medals and areas in year 2004
Area
Counts for medal rank
gold
silver
bronze
excellent
total
Northern
1
0
15
33
49
Touyuan Hsin-Chou
3
1
9
10
23
Middle
1
4
10
28
43
Southern
5
14
15
60
94
Total
10
19
49
131
209
Table 5: The cross table about medals and areas in year 2005
Area
Counts for medal rank
gold
silver
bronze
excellent
total
Northern
2
4
10
30
46
Touyuan & Hsin-Chou
4
4
12
26
46
Middle
1
1
10
18
30
Southern
3
11
18
56
88
Total
10
20
50
130
210
Table 6: The cross table about medals and areas in year 2006
Area
Counts for medal rank
gold
silver
bronze
excellent
total
Northern
3
9
16
29
57
Taoyuan & Hsinchu
3
2
4
12
21
Middle
1
2
10
25
38
Southern
3
7
20
52
82
Total
10
20
50
118
198
Table 7: The cross table about medals and areas in year 2007
Area
Counts for medal rank
gold
silver
bronze
excellent
total
Northern
1
3
11
19
34
Taoyuan & Hsinchu
0
3
5
17
25
Middle
4
3
16
23
46
Southern
5
11
18
61
95
Total
10
20
50
120
200
Table 8: The correlation analysis about medals and areas from year 2004~2007
Area
Counts for medal rank
Chi-Square test
gold
silver
bronze
excellent
total
Chi-Square value
p value
Northern
7
16
52
111
186
14.88
0.09
Taoyuan & Hsinchu
10
10
30
65
115
Middle
7
10
46
94
157
Southern
16
43
71
229
359
Total
40
79
199
359
817
Copyright (C) 2008 HKIEd APFSLT. Volume 9, Issue 1, Article 12 (Jun., 2008). All Rights Reserved.
