Sentence examples for participation score from inspiring English sources

To ensure parity between instructor group scoring, the raw total was converted into a percentage where the highest scoring participant would receive a total participation score of 100%%.

This would be reduced by 5%% for every 5 point difference in the raw score between participants (e.g. if the highest raw score was 65, then other participant's raw scores from 60 65 were also assigned 100%%, participants with raw scores between 55 60 gained a participation score of 95%%, etc).

Where participants provided a 'yes' answer to activities, they were asked for the number of times they had participated and we used this information to calculate a total participation score per person (Additional file 2: Figure S2 describes calculations).

A linear regression was performed with learning style orientation (PO, GAO and IAO) as predictors of participation score, with the results showing that the PO orientation was a significant positive predictor of participation score in instructor group 1 (r 2  = .166, b = 6.873, StdE 2.933, sig < .050), and in instructor group 2 (r 2  = .322, b = 8.911, StdE 2.798, sig < .002).002

Alongside the ten criteria adopted in Table 1, previous research suggests participation rates increase when a participation score is included in the assessment rubric (Dallimore et al. 2004, 2013; Carstens et al. 2012).

It thus appears from the data as though the participation requirement pushed PO learners to participate more at the expense of IAO learners, which had the subsequent effect of reducing the overall participation score assigned to the participation groups.

The finding that participation scores were generally lower in the participation groups, and that IAO learners received lower participation scores generally, appears to be linked.

Participation scores, in turn, correlated moderately with depression scores, apathy scores, executive function scores, and memory scores.

In summary, those with PO LSOs generally achieved higher participation scores, while those with IAO LSOs generally did not get high scores for participation.

Participation scores were highly predictive of outcome; affective and cognitive problems may influence rehabilitation outcome mainly by causing poorer participation in therapy.

The analysis then focused on the relationship between LSO and the participation scores given to participation and control groups respectively at the end of the semester.