GPA fails to distinguish three pairs of learner groups that differ in standards-attainment patterns¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Post hoc Tukey tests found no significant GPA differences between the Engaging and effective vs Knowledgeable and strategic groups, the Novice vs Student-centred groups, and the Engaging and effective vs Student-centred groups, although these groups showed distinct standards-attainment patterns. → Abhinava Barthakur 2026

Evidence¶

Abhinava Barthakur 2026¶

Abhinava Barthakur, Jelena Jovanović, Ryan Baker, Vitomir Kovanović, Christopher Charles Deneen and Shane Dawson. (2026). Assessing Patterns of Students' Attainment of Professional Standards in Higher Education. Journal of Learning Analytics, 13(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2026.9035

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Post hoc Tukey pairwise comparisons of mean GPAs among the five clusters; the article reports the three named pairs "do not differ in GPA". The authors state the latent groups captured attainment differences the GPAs did not. No effect size is printed.

"Specifically, the following three group pairs do not differ in GPA: a) the Engaging and effective group and the Knowledgeable and strategic group, b) the Novice group and the Student-centred group, c) the Engaging and effective group and the Student-centred group."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Hierarchical clustering of CDM attainment probabilities identifies five learner groups with distinct patterns of professional standards attainment — related
• Mean program GPA differs significantly across the five standards-attainment learner groups — related
• Standard 1 (knowing students) was attained relatively easily by all groups except the Novice group, while Standard 4 (supportive and safe environments) proved most challenging — related