Of the 104 students in the class, 99 completed the first survey (administered at the time of the midterm examination), and 89 completed the second survey (administered at the time of the final examination). All completed surveys were used to classify students by the number of puzzle activities used for the purposes of comparative statistics and evaluations of correlations. For responses regarding the utility of puzzles and student enjoyment of the activities, only surveys from those students who used at least one of the activities were evaluated (n = 59 on the midterm survey, n = 50 on the final survey).When evaluating individual quiz scores, there were no significant differences in scores between those students who had used the respective puzzle activities prior to taking the quizzes and those who had not used the puzzles as a part of their studies (all p > .05).A small but statistically significant correlation was found between number of puzzle topics used and students’ midterm exam scores (R = .23, R2 = .051, p = .025), final exam scores (R = .22, R2 = .048, p = .038), and overall course scores (R = .23, R2 = .053, p = .030). Students who used 2 to 4 puzzle topics prior to taking the midterm examination performed better on the midterm exam than those who used one or no puzzle topics (52.8 vs. 49.9 points out of 60, p = .013). A specific cutoff value producing improved scores was not identified when evaluating students’ final examination scores. However, students who used two or more puzzle topics over the semester had higher overall course scores than those who used one or no puzzle topics (208.7 vs. 201.3 points out of 240 possible, p = .021).The overall use of activity topics by students decreased over the course of the semester. The first topic (i.e., the puzzles related to the material covered by the first quiz) was the most used topic, with 74% of survey respondents reporting that they used that topic. Use of topics dropped over the semester to a low of 27% utilization of the sixth topic before rebounding to 32% for the seventh topic and 37% for the final topic (Figure 4).Figure 4: Proportion of veterinary students reporting use of each topic (or chapter) in The Isle of ImaginingCh = chapter, F = finalOn the midterm survey, among respondents who used at least one of the puzzle activities, the majority of students (52.5%) found the activities to be somewhat useful (score of 4 out of 5), and 74.6% found the activities to be either somewhat useful or very useful (a score of 4 or 5, n = 44/59). Similar proportions were found on the final survey, where 82% of respondents (n = 41/50) found the activities to be somewhat useful or very useful.On the midterm survey, among respondents who used at least one of the puzzle activities, 80% of students either moderately enjoyed The Isle of Imagining (score of 5 out of 6, n = 20/60) or enjoyed The Isle of Imagining a lot (score of 6, n = 28/60). On the final survey, 98% of respondents (n = 46/47) reported at least a degree of enjoyment of the puzzles (scores 4–6), with 47% reporting that they enjoyed the puzzles a lot (score of 6, n = 22/47). When asked about the narrative components, proportions of enjoyment were similar, with 98% (n = 53/54) reporting at least some enjoyment, and 52% of respondents stating that they enjoyed the narrative a lot (score of 6, n = 28/54).In the free-response sections of the surveys, numerous students described the puzzles as being useful to their studies. Many of the positive comments centered around the general concepts of using the puzzles to organize students’ notes and thoughts as well as providing a novel means of studying. Many students also appreciated the different perspective provided by the puzzle activities as compared with conventional case-based studying. There was not a clear-cut favorite type of puzzle, although the Venn diagrams were the most commonly mentioned puzzles that students enjoyed and found useful. In terms of the narrative, there were generally two camps of students—one group of students read most, or all, of the narrative sections and found them to be enjoyable and funny; the other group did not read the narrative sections, as these students felt that time expenditure was not worth it, so these students focused solely on the puzzles themselves.

This study demonstrates that the development of educational puzzles is readily feasible, and the use of a set of puzzles as an adjunct learning and studying tool can be useful for improving students’ understanding of radiographic interpretive principles. While students who used a given puzzle topic did not perform better on the associated quiz than students who did not use the puzzles, students who used at least two of the puzzle topics during the semester demonstrated longer-term improvements in terms of higher scores on the midterm exam and the course as a whole. The reason for the lack of differences in scores on the individual quizzes is unclear. However, it is suspected that the open-book nature of the quizzes and the relatively low number of questions limited variation in student scores and thus limited the power of the exercise to identify differences between groups.Of particular note is the declining utilization of the puzzle activities by students over the course of the semester, despite the vast majority of students stating that they found the activities both useful and entertaining. Usage of the sixth topic, near the end of the semester, was only approximately one-third the rate of usage of the first topic at the beginning of the semester. Although there was a slight rebound at the conclusion of the semester as students studied the final topic, which was specifically geared toward preparation for the final examination, the rate of utilization of this topic was still only half of the utilization of the first topic. This correlates with experiences in utilization of mobile game apps; for example, according to a 2019 benchmark report on the mobile gaming industry, the median 1-day user retention is approximately 25%, and median 7-day user retention is approximately 6%.10 User engagement drops rapidly with repetitive gameplay unless new content is introduced.10 Similar findings have been described in a gamified portion of an engineering course, where gameplay for learning dramatically decreased over the course of a semester.11 The use of different types of puzzles was intended in part to provide students greater variety and reduce repetitive activities; however, in light of the identified decline in student participation over the semester, it is unclear if the variation mitigated what could have been a more precipitous decline or if it had minimal or no effect on student participation.We could question if the puzzle activities should be required throughout the semester, especially if there is evidence that they may be beneficial to student learning. Answering such a question is certainly beyond the scope of this study, and a decision in either direction would require a consideration of the benefits of the puzzles and the additional time required of all students to complete the activities. It is also necessary to acknowledge that different students have different preferences in terms of learning styles (visual vs. verbal perception, sequential vs. global understanding)12—the variety of puzzles was intended to provide options to students regardless of their preferences, so to mandate puzzle use against a given student’s learning preferences could have negative consequences.The primary limitation of this study is that student participation was voluntary, so it is possible that any differences in scores between students who used the puzzles and those who did not are actually due to other factors. Students who had a stronger inclination toward imaging may have been more likely to use the puzzles, thus artifactually increasing scores in that group. Alternatively, students who found imaging more challenging could have been more likely to use the activities as an additional study guide, which would, in turn, depress the scores for the puzzle-use group. To better assess the effects of puzzle use on student outcomes, a randomized prospective study could be performed to compare puzzle use to conventional studying.

Out of 100 people selected for a school survey, 59 were junior students, 3 were teachers and the rest were senior students. Write these ratios in simplest form:Question 1Workboarda. teachers : juniors = SUBMIT (ATTEMPT 1 OF 2)Question 2Workboardb. juniors : seniors = SUBMIT (ATTEMPT 1 OF 2)Question 3Workboardc. seniors : teachers = SUBMIT (ATTEMPT 1 OF 2)Question 4Workboardd. teachers : students = SUBMIT (ATTEMPT 1 OF 2)Question 5Workboarde. juniors : other members of the survey = SUBMIT (ATTEMPT 1 OF 2)

A study was carried out to investigate exam performance for university students. One version of the study involved students at the University of Taranaki, who volunteered to be in the study. Two groups were compared: a group that were trained in a new study technique and a group that were asked to use their current study technique. These groups were determined by giving participants the option to choose which group they were in. The researchers conducted a two sample t-test and found a difference of 6.5 between the mean exam scores for each group (p-value = 0.062), with the group that were trained in a new study technique having the higher mean. What kind of study was this (experiment or observational)

Marks scored by 104 students of a college in the mid-term exam given below. Draw histogram. Marks No. of students 0-24 12 24-40 16 40-48 24 48-68 40 68-80 12

A student must complete all quizzes, postings, and midterms to receive the boost to his/her course grade with improvement on the final.