A subset of top-performing subjects achieved substantially higher map accuracy, indicating some students understood the mapping technique well¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Analysis of top performing subjects showed individual accuracies such as 0.560 rising to 0.734 on the electric grid problem and 0.342 rising to 0.829 on the heat exchanger problem. → Foster 2016

Evidence¶

Foster 2016¶

Foster, W. T., Shahhosseini, A. M., & Maughan, G. (2016). Advancing Diagnostic Skills for Technology and Engineering Undergraduates: A Summary of the Validation Data. Journal of Technology Education, 28(1). https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v28n1/

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Individual-level analysis (Table 4) of the highest-performing subjects' first and second attempt accuracies on both problems, reported descriptively alongside the group-level null results. The discussion states about 20% of subjects clearly understood the technique.

"Although group data confirmed that by and large the subjects did not perform well on the three problems included in this training, analysis of the top performing subjects demonstrated that some students did in fact understand the problem and the process mapping technique reasonably well, as shown in Table 4."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Second-submission accuracy on the electrical grid problem was significantly lower than first-submission accuracy, the reverse of expectations — related
• Structured algorithmic mappings (Traditional and Reversed) produce higher first-attempt learning accuracy than an arbitrary single-tone mapping in visual-to-auditory SSD learning — related