teas prep course trends your future begins today joel collazo, md maria e guzman, mpm
TRANSCRIPT
TEAS prep course trends
YOUR FUTURE BEGINS TODAY
Joel Collazo, MDMaria E Guzman, MPM
PROGRESS PER CAMPUS AND ALL DMC
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS OF STUDENTS THAT TOOK THE REVIEW
Apr 18th Apr 27th May 7th May 8th May 15th
Total 37 49 63 65 67
Passed 27 37 49 51 54
Failed 10 12 14 14 13
DMC all campuses
Apr 18th
Apr 27th
May 7th
May 8th
May 15th
May 22nd
Passing stu-dents
0.72970000000
0001
0.75510000000
0001
0.77770000000
0001
0.7846 0.8059 0.8354
Fail-ing stu-dents
0.2702 0.2448 0.2222 0.2153 0.194 0.1645
5.00%15.00%25.00%35.00%45.00%55.00%65.00%75.00%85.00%
Passing studentsFailing students
TEAS prep course trends: DMCPa
ssin
g vs
. Fai
ling
Hialeah-Miami Lakes CampusApr 18th Apr 27th May 7th May 8th May 15th
Total 5 12 24 26 27
Passed 3 10 22 24 25
Failed 2 2 2 2 2
Apr 18th
Apr 27th
May 7th
May 8th
May 15th
May22nd
Passing stu-dents
0.60000000000
0001
0.8333 0.8333 0.923 0.9259 0.9375
Fail-ing stu-dents
0.4 0.1666 0.1666 0.0769 0.074 0.0625
5.00%15.00%25.00%35.00%45.00%55.00%65.00%75.00%85.00%95.00%
Passing studentsFailing students
TEAS prep course trends: Miami Lakes campusPa
ssin
g vs
. Fai
ling
Homestead CampusApr 18th Apr 27th May 7th May 8th May 15th
Total 8 8 8 8 8
Passed 7 7 7 7 7
Failed 1 1 1 1 1
Apr 18th
Apr 27th
May 7th
May 8th
May15th
May 22nd
Passing stu-dents
0.87500000000
0001
0.87500000000
0001
0.87500000000
0001
0.87500000000
0001
0.87500000000
0001
0.8888
Fail-ing stu-dents
0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.125 0.1111
5.00%15.00%25.00%35.00%45.00%55.00%65.00%75.00%85.00%
Passing studentsFailing students
TEAS prep course trends: Homestead campusPa
ssin
g vs
. Fai
ling
Miami CampusApr 18th Apr 27th May 7th May 8th May 15th
Total 10 15 17 17 17
Passed 6 9 9 9 10
Failed 4 6 8 8 7
Apr 18th
Apr 27th
May 7th
May 8th
May 15th
May 22nd
Passing stu-dents
0.60000000000
0001
0.60000000000
0001
0.5294 0.5294 0.5882 0.69560000000
0001
Fail-ing stu-dents
0.4 0.4 0.4705 0.4705 0.4117 0.3181
5.00%15.00%25.00%35.00%45.00%55.00%65.00%
Passing studentsFailing students
TEAS prep course trends: Miami campusPa
ssin
g vs
. Fai
ling
Hollywood campusApr 18th Apr 27th May 7th May 8th May 15th
Total 14 14 14 14 15
Passed 11 11 11 11 12
Failed 3 3 3 3 3
Apr 18th
Apr 27th
May 7th
May 8th
May 15th
May 22nd
Passing students
0.7857 0.7857 0.7857 0.7857 0.8 0.8
Failing students
0.2142 0.2142 0.2142 0.2142 0.2 0.2
5.00%15.00%25.00%35.00%45.00%55.00%65.00%75.00%
Passing studentsFailing students
TEAS prep course trends: Hollywood campus
Axis Title
COMPARISON BETWEEN
REVIEW AND NO REVIEW STUDENTS
DMC: TOTAL OF STUDENTS THAT TOOK THE TEAS TEST (JAN-MAY 2012)
NO REVIEW REVIEW TOTAL
327 67 394
DMC: ALL CAMPUSES No Review Review
90-100% 0 1
80-89% 59 2370-79% 94 17
60-69% 68 13
50-59% 46 7
40-49% 31 4
30-39% 23 2
Less than 30 6 0
90-100%
80-89% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 30-39% Less than 30
No Re-view
0 0.1804 0.2874 0.2079 0.1406 0.0948000000000001
0.0703000000000001
0.0183
Re-view
0.0149 0.3432 0.2537 0.194 0.1044 0.0590000000000001
0.0298 0
3%
8%
13%
18%
23%
28%
33%
No Review
Review
DMC: ALL CAMPUSES
HOMESTEAD:TOTAL OF STUDENTS THAT TOOK THE TEAS TEST (JAN-MAY 2012)
NO REVIEW REVIEW TOTAL
71 8 79
HOMESTEAD No Review Review
90-100% 0 0
80-89% 13 5
70-79% 15 1
60-69% 19 1
50-59% 13 1
40-49% 4 0
30-39% 5 0
Less than 30 2 0
90-100%
80-89% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 30-39% Less than 30
No Re-view
0 0.183 0.2112 0.2676 0.183 0.0563 0.0704 0.0281
Re-view
0 0.625000000000001
0.125 0.125 0.125 0 0 0
5%
15%
25%
35%
45%
55%
65%
No Review
Review
HOMESTEAD CAMPUS
MIAMI:TOTAL OF STUDENTS THAT TOOK THE TEAS TEST (JAN-MAY 2012)
NO REVIEW REVIEW TOTAL
116 17 133
MIAMI No Review Review
90-100% 0 0
80-89% 22 2
70-79% 46 3
60-69% 19 5
50-59% 17 3
40-49% 6 2
30-39% 5 2
Less than 30 1 0
90-100%
80-89% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 30-39% Less than 30
No Re-view
0 0.1896 0.396500000000001
0.1637 0.1465 0.0517 0.0301 0.0086000000000000
1
Re-view
0 0.1176 0.1764 0.2941 0.1764 0.1176 0.1176 0
2.50%
7.50%
12.50%
17.50%
22.50%
27.50%
32.50%
37.50%
No Review
Review
MIAMI CAMPUS
HOLLYWOOD: TOTAL OF STUDENTS THAT TOOK THE TEAS TEST (JAN-MAY 2012)
NO REVIEW REVIEW TOTAL
79 15 94
HOLLYWOOD Non Review Review
90-100% 0 0
80-89% 5 2
70-79% 16 5
60-69% 19 5
50-59% 11 3
40-49% 17 0
30-39% 10 0
Less than 30 1 0
90-100%
80-89% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 30-39% Less than 30
Non Re-view
0 0.0632 0.2025 0.2405 0.1392 0.2151 0.1265 0.0126
Re-view
0 0.1333 0.333300000000001
0.333300000000001
0.2 0 0 0
3%
8%
13%
18%
23%
28%
33%
Non Review
Review
HOLLYWOOD CAMPUS
MIAMI LAKES:TOTAL OF STUDENTS THAT TOOK THE TEAS TEST (JAN-MAY 2012)
NO REVIEW REVIEW TOTAL
61 27 88
MIAMI LAKES No Review Review
100-90% 0 1
80-89% 19 14
70-79% 17 8
60-69% 11 2
50-59% 5 0
40-49% 4 2
30-39% 3 0
Less than 30 2 0
100-90%
80-89% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 30-39% Less than 30
No Re-view
0 0.3064 0.2741 0.1774 0.0833 0.0666 0.0491 0.0333
Re-view
0.037 0.5185 0.2962 0.074 0 0.074 0 0
5%
15%
25%
35%
45%
55%
No Review
Review
MIAMI LAKES CAMPUS
DATA COLLECTION
• THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS WAS DONE WITH DATA OBTAINED FROM ALL FOUR CAMPUSES WHERE THE TEAS PREPARATION COURSE IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE.
• BETWEEN JANUARY AND MAY 2012.• INCLUDE A TOTAL POPULATION OF 394
STUDENTS.
DATAX0 X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 NR R M ML HOM HOLL
2 3 4 5 11 17 19 0 61 0 0 1 0 00 0 2 0 2 8 14 1 0 27 0 1 0 01 10 17 11 19 16 5 0 79 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 3 5 5 2 0 0 15 0 0 0 11 5 6 17 19 46 22 0 116 0 1 0 0 00 2 2 5 5 3 2 0 0 17 1 0 0 02 5 4 13 19 15 13 0 71 0 0 0 1 00 0 0 1 1 1 5 0 0 8 0 0 1 0
Legend
X0 Less than 30 X5 (70-79%) M Miami CampusX1 (30-39%) X6 (80-89%) ML Miami Lakes CampusX2 (40-49%) X7 (90-100%) HOM Homestead CampusX3 (50-59%) NR No review HOLL Hollywood CampusX4 (60-69%) R review
• General Regression Analysis: X3 versus R, NR • Regression Equation• X3 = 1.13229 + 0.0215274 R + 0.129967 NR • Coefficients• Term Coef SE Coef T P 95% CI• Constant 1.13229 2.81034 0.40290 0.704 (-6.09191, 8.35650)• R 0.02153 0.16012 0.13445 0.898 (-0.39007, 0.43313)• NR 0.12997 0.03560 3.65128 0.015 ( 0.03847, 0.22147) • Summary of Model • S = 2.52636 R-Sq = 88.26% R-Sq(adj) = 83.57%• PRESS = 96.3839 R-Sq(pred) = 64.55% • Analysis of Variance • Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P• Regression 2 239.962 239.962 119.981 18.7984 0.004720• R 1 154.872 0.115 0.115 0.0181 0.898294• NR 1 85.091 85.091 85.091 13.3318 0.014729• Error 5 31.913 31.913 6.383• Total 7 271.875
• General Regression Analysis: X4 versus R, NR • Regression Equation • X4 = 4.74964 - 0.0736235 R + 0.146592 NR• Coefficients • Term Coef SE Coef T P 95% CI• Constant 4.74964 3.56606 1.33190 0.240 (-4.41720, 13.9165)• R -0.07362 0.20318 -0.36236 0.732 (-0.59590, 0.4487)• NR 0.14659 0.04517 3.24558 0.023 ( 0.03049, 0.2627) • Summary of Model• S = 3.20572 R-Sq = 88.29% R-Sq(adj) = 83.61%• PRESS = 151.251 R-Sq(pred) = 65.54% • Analysis of Variance • Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P• Regression 2 387.492 387.492 193.746 18.8531 0.004690• R 1 279.240 1.349 1.349 0.1313 0.731893• NR 1 108.252 108.252 108.252 10.5338 0.022808• Error 5 51.383 51.383 10.277• Total 7 438.875
• General Regression Analysis: X5 versus R, NR • Regression Equation • X5 = -8.57511 + 0.70737 R + 0.404303 NR • Coefficients • Term Coef SE Coef T P 95% CI• Constant -8.57511 6.50567 -1.31810 0.245 (-25.2985, 8.14824)• R 0.70737 0.37066 1.90841 0.115 ( -0.2454, 1.66018)• NR 0.40430 0.08240 4.90665 0.004 ( 0.1925, 0.61612) • Summary of Model • S = 5.84829 R-Sq = 88.16% R-Sq(adj) = 83.43%• PRESS = 689.874 R-Sq(pred) = 52.25% • Analysis of Variance • Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P• Regression 2 1273.86 1273.86 636.931 18.6224 0.004819• R 1 450.43 124.57 124.566 3.6420 0.114620• NR 1 823.43 823.43 823.432 24.0752 0.004449• Error 5 171.01 171.01 34.202• Total 7 1444.88
• General Regression Analysis: X6 versus R, NR • Regression Equation • X6 = -0.609787 + 0.400043 R + 0.183717 NR • Coefficients • Term Coef SE Coef T P 95% CI• Constant -0.609787 7.05776 -0.08640 0.935 (-18.7523, 17.5328)• R 0.400043 0.40211 0.99485 0.365 ( -0.6336, 1.4337)• NR 0.183717 0.08939 2.05519 0.095 ( -0.0461, 0.4135)• Summary of Model• S = 6.34460 R-Sq = 52.92% R-Sq(adj) = 34.09%• PRESS = 554.867 R-Sq(pred) = -29.79%• Analysis of Variance• Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P• Regression 2 226.231 226.231 113.115 2.81004 0.152091• R 1 56.206 39.840 39.840 0.98972 0.365488• NR 1 170.025 170.025 170.025 4.22380 0.095013• Error 5 201.269 201.269 40.254• Total 7 427.500
• General Regression Analysis: X7 versus R, NR • Regression Equation • X7 = -0.475285 + 0.0450222 R + 0.00546112 NR • Coefficients • Term Coef SE Coef T P 95% CI• Constant -0.475285 0.253513 -1.87479 0.120 (-1.12696, 0.176392)• R 0.045022 0.014444 3.11705 0.026 ( 0.00789, 0.082151)• NR 0.005461 0.003211 1.70079 0.150 (-0.00279, 0.013715)• Summary of Model• S = 0.227896 R-Sq = 70.32% R-Sq(adj) = 58.45%• PRESS = 1.47961 R-Sq(pred) = -69.10%• Analysis of Variance• Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P• Regression 2 0.615316 0.615316 0.307658 5.92370 0.047984• R 1 0.465079 0.504617 0.504617 9.71598 0.026340• NR 1 0.150237 0.150237 0.150237 2.89269 0.149724• Error 5 0.259684 0.259684 0.051937• Total 7 0.875000
INTERPRETATION OF Y-INTERCEP AND SLOPE COEFFICIENTS
X3(50-59%)
B1 = 0.0215 For every one unit increase in the review takers, the interval goes up by 2.15%
B2 = 0.1299 For every one unit increase in the no review takers, the interval goes up by 12.99%
X4(60-69%)
B1 = -0.0736 For every one unit increase in the review takers, the interval goes down by 7.36%
B2 = 0.1472 For every one unit increase in the no review takers, the interval goes up by 14.72%
X5(70-79%)
B1 = 0.7073 For every one unit increase in the review takers, the interval goes up by 70.7%
B2= 0.4043 For every one unit increase in the no review takers, the interval goes up by 40.43%
X6(80-89%)
B1 = 0.4000 For every one unit increase in the review takers, the interval goes up by 40%
B2 = 0.1837 For every one unit increase in the no review takers, the interval goes up by 18.37%
X7(90-100%)
B1= 0.0450 For every one unit increase in the review takers, the interval goes up by 4.5%
B2= 0.0054 For every one unit increase in the no review takers, the interval goes up by 0.54%
INTERPRETATION OF THE COEFFCIENT OF MULTIPLE DETERMINATION
• R2 = proportion of variation in the dependent variable y that is explained by variation in the independent variables Xί. When R2 is close to 1, it is an indication that the model is a good fit to the data.
X3 R2 = 0.8826X4 R2 = 0.8829X5 R2 = 0.8160X6 R2 = 0.5292X7 R2 = 0.7032
INTERPRETATION OF THE COEFFICIENT OF CORRELATION
• The correlation coefficient is a number that range from -1 to +1. Positive values indicate a relationship between X and Y variables such that a values X increases, values for Y also increase
X3 R = 0.9395X4 R = 0.9396X5 R = 0.9033X6 R = 0.7275X7 R = 0.8386
F-TESTHYPOTHESIS
• Ho : β1…..β10 = 0No linear relationship between the dependent
variable and the independent variables.
• Ha : β1 ≠ 0Linear relationship between the dependent
variable and the independent variables.
• Reject Ho at level of significance if F (model) > Fα, otherwise do not reject Ho. Using α= 0.05 level of significance to find the critical value of the F distribution with ( 2/5)
F (model) Fα
X3 18.7984 5.79
X4 18.8531 5.79
X5 18.6224 5.79
X6 2.81004 5.79
X7 5.9237 5.79
t-TEST
• Ho : β1 = 0 versus Ha : β1 ≠ 0• If we reject Ho at the 0.05 level , we can
conclude that X1 is significantly related to the dependent variable y.
X3 (R) P= 0.004720
(NR) P= 0.014729
X4 (R) P= 0.731895
(NR) P = 0.022808
X5 (R) P= 0.114620
(NR) P = 0.004449
X6 (R) P = 0.365488
(NR) P = 0.095013
X7 (R) P = 0.026340
(NR) P = 0.149724
CONCLUSIONS
1. The TEAS preparation course is significantly effective.2. For the dependent variable:• X3 (50-59%): Higher incidence of No Review (12.99%)• X4 (60-69%): Higher incidence of No Review (14.72%)• X5 (70-79%): Higher incidence of Review (70.73%)• X6 (80-89%): Higher incidence of Review (40.00%)• X7 (90-100%): Higher incidence of Review (4.50 %)• We can conclude that those students that take the students
that take the TEAS preparation course at DMC achieve the best scores in the TEAS test.
2. All Models (Regression) explain above 70% of the total of the variation in predicting the scores of the TEAS test takers.
3. The Correlation Coefficient indicates a strong positive correlation, meaning that any increase in each interval depends on the increase of Review and No Review students that take the TEAS test.
4. F-test: we reject Ho, concluding that at least ONE on the independent variable is significant.
5. The t-test shows: That there is a strong evidence that Review and No Review are significantly related with X3; X5; X6 and X7.There is a strong evidence that No Review is significantly related with X4.There is no evidence that Review be significantly related with X4.
RECOMMENDATIONS• Continue offering the program to prospective students.• Offer the program to students that did not pass the TEAS and
did not took the preparation course offered at DMC.• Implement a system that allows the flow of information
between admissions departments and the coordination of the program (enrollment lists, attendance, etc.)
• Regulate the enrollment of students to fixed start terms to be able to control as much as possible the appointments for the TEAS test.
• We suggest that the students have a priority date to take the TEAS after finishing their preparation.
• To perform a prospective study to analyze the relationship between Review and No Review students, their academic trajectory and the results at NCLEX.