Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Procedia
Available Computer
online Science 00 (2019) 000–000
at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18

3rd World Conference on Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship (WOCTINE)

3rd World Conference on Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship (WOCTINE)
Investigating the academic success of industrial engineering
Investigating the academic success of industrial engineering
students in terms of various variables
students in terms of various variables
İbrahim Halil Korkmaz1,*, Ayca Özceylan22, Eren Özceylan33
İbrahim Halil Korkmaz , Ayca Özceylan , Eren Özceylan
1
1,*
University of Gaziantep, Islahiye Vocational School, Gaziantep, Turkey
12University
of Gaziantep,
Gaziantep, Islahiye
Oguzeli Vocational
University of Vocational School,
School, Gaziantep,
Gaziantep, Turkey
Turkey
3
University
2 of Gaziantep,
University Industrial
of Gaziantep, OguzeliEngineering
VocationalDepartment, Gaziantep,
School, Gaziantep, Turkey
Turkey
3
University of Gaziantep, Industrial Engineering Department, Gaziantep, Turkey

Abstract
Abstract
University education has a great importance in the development of both the individuals and the societies they belong to. Students
who are successful
University education in has
university
a great education
importance caninperform their jobs of
the development more
bothsuccessfully in theand
the individuals future. This is reflected
the societies in the
they belong to.efficiency
Students
whowelfare
and are successful in university
of the society. In thiseducation
respect, can performaffecting
the factors their jobsthe
more successfully
success in thestudents
of university future. This is reflected
in their in are
education the efficiency
worthy of
and welfare
research. In of
thisthestudy,
society. In this
it has beenrespect, the factors
investigated affecting
whether the success
the success levelsofofuniversity
Department students in their education
of Industrial are Gaziantep
Engineering, worthy of
University
research. Instudents differ
this study, it in
hasterms
beenofinvestigated
various variables.
whether Asthe
a result of the
success study,
levels it was found of
of Department that the general
Industrial point average
Engineering, (GPA)
Gaziantep
University
of students
university students differ in terms
differed of variousaccording
significantly variables.toAs a result
their of the
genders, study, it was
educational found that
programs, agethe general
ranges andpoint average
classes. (GPA)
In addition,
ofwas
it university students
observed that the differed
GPA ofsignificantly
the studentsaccording to their
did not differ genders, educational
significantly according toprograms, age ranges
the geographical and they
regions classes.
cameIn from
addition,
and
their
it washoroscopes.
observed thatIt isthe
thought
GPA of that
thethe resultsdid
students of the
notstudy
differcan be used toaccording
significantly educate theto students more successfully.
the geographical regions they came from and
their horoscopes. It is thought that the results of the study can be used to educate the students more successfully.
© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review
© under responsibility
2019 The Author(s). Published by of Elsevier
the scientific
B.V. committee of the 3rd World Conference on Technology, Innovation and
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 3rd World Conference on Technology, Innovation and
Peer-review under
Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship responsibility of the scientific committee of the 3rd World Conference on Technology, Innovation and
Entrepreneurship
Keywords: Academic success; gender; age range; educational program;horoscopes
Keywords: Academic success; gender; age range; educational program;horoscopes

1. Introduction
1. Introduction
As long as the education has a vital role in human capital development and connected with better living
As long as[8],
opportunities thetheeducation
education has a at
given vital role in and
universities human capital of
the success development
students areand connected
extremely with issues.
important better Hence
living
opportunities [8],increment
the productivity the education given at universities
of individuals and the
is influenced bysuccess of their
level of students are extremely
acquiesced important
knowledge andissues.
skills. Hence
Thus,
the productivity
economic growthincrement of individuals
of countries is influenced
can be achieved by levelsources
by new earning of theirleaded
acquiesced
by newknowledge and skills.
earning sources leadedThus,
by
economicingrowth
increase of countries
productivity [32]. can be achieved by new earning sources leaded by new earning sources leaded by
increase in productivity [32].
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: ihalil@yahoo.com
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: ihalil@yahoo.com
The academic performance of the students has an important effect on production of qualified graduates who will
The academic performance of the students has an important effect on production of qualified graduates who will
1877-0509 © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review©under
1877-0509 2019responsibility
The Author(s).of the scientific
Published bycommittee of the 3rd World Conference on Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 3rd World Conference on Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship

1877-0509 © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 3rd World Conference on Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship
10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.022
10 İbrahim Halil Korkmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18
2 Garah & Audira/ Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

be responsible for social and economic development of countries [2]. According to the definition of the Turkish
Language Association [37], success is a positive product of the temporal or operational activities of the person,
depending on his / her skill and upbringing. According to another definition, success is the result of the interaction of
the learner with the environment [9]. Unlike the success variable, the concept of academic achievement is the notes,
skills or knowledge about the courses in the program of an educational institution [33]. Academic achievement can
be defined as the provision of the individual's success in the courses given in the schools, by expressing them into
concrete evidence by the teachers, and by the contribution of the student to their positive self [10]. The academic
achievement, which consists of the sum of the students' self-earned during their school life, is evaluated in the most
concrete form by calculating the grades taken from the courses and the weighted grade point average of the students.
The grades taken from the courses show the performance of the student [21]. The concept of academic achievement
can be thought as the degree of realization of the targeted behaviours and its relationship with the curriculum.
Academic achievement, which significantly affects the whole life of students, is extremely important both for the
individual and for the society in which the individual lives. An academically strong student who is motivated by his
/ her goals, able to motivate himself, to cope with the difficulties he faces, to take success as a basic condition and to
improve himself and to renew himself, is the most important factor in the rise of society [5].
Since there is an acceptance or perception towards the grade point average, the success of the course which affects
this type of point is an important situation. The contribution of each course given to the general grade point average
in terms of engaging in professional identity appears as a situation to be investigated [4]. There are amount of
researches used it to measure the student performance through this way [23; 31; 28]. The factors affecting the
academic performance of the students attract the attention of all stakeholders. These factors can be listed as student
factors, school factors, family factors and peer factors [13]. The variables such as gender, age, geographical
belongingness etc are considered under the demography umbrella [6] and referred as a way of exploring demographic
variables effects in social and biological context [20]. Because of the important role of personal characteristics such
as race, sex, gender in academic success [22], demographic features are worthy of research in this matter [20]. In fact,
there are many studies investigating the effects of these demographic characteristics on academic achievement. For
example, academic achievement and genders relationship has been discussed for decades [18]. Chambers and
Schreiber [11] had found a gap between boys and girls that girls have better performance than boys in academic
achievement. Besides, father’s occupation and ethnicity had been found as variables which have significant
contributions on students’ performance [30; 27].
In this study, it is aimed to determine the effect of various variables on academic success of students of Gaziantep
University, Department of Industrial Engineering. In this context gender, age range and geographical zone where the
students come from were used as the demographic variables. In addition to that, the class and the type of education
program (formal program and secondary program) were examined. Finally, as an interesting variable, the horoscopes
of students were determined and analysed according to detect if there is a succession difference between them or not.
Grade point average of each student has used as measure of their academic performance according to the literatural
approvement on this variable.

2. Methodology

This study, which aims to investigate the academic achievements of university students in terms of various
variables, is designed in a descriptive form. Students and graduates of the Department of Industrial Engineering at
Gaziantep University are the population of the study. In this context, data obtained from the student affairs
information system of the department were used for the analysis. Total amount of the population is 1621 students and
graduates. The sample of the study consisted of 616 subject selected randomly from the population. This sample size
is quite sufficient for representation of the population at a reliability rate of 95% [34]. The data obtained by the
secondary method for this sampling were analysed in accordance with the test of the null hypotheses listed below.
Ha0. There is no significant difference in the Industrial Engineering students’ and graduates’ academic achievements in relation to their
gender.
Hb0. There is no significant difference in the Industrial Engineering students’ and graduates’ academic achievements in relation to their
education program.
Hc0. There is no significant difference in the Industrial Engineering students’ and graduates’ academic achievements in relation to the
geographical region they came from.
 İbrahim Halil Korkmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18 11
Garah & Audira/ Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 3

Hd0. There is no significant difference in the Industrial Engineering students’ and graduates’ academic achievements in relation to their age
ranges.
He0. There is no significant difference in the Industrial Engineering students’ and graduates’ academic achievements in relation to their
classes.
Hg0. There is no significant difference in the Industrial Engineering students’ and graduates’ academic achievements in relation to their
horoscopes.
For the test of Ha0 and Hb0 t-test which is a parametric technique that compares population parameters using two
related or independent samples drawn from two populations [12] was applied. Remaining hypotheses were tested by
using ANOVA which is a method used for testing the parameters comparison of given k independent samples [14].
SPSS 23.0 was used to perform the statistical analysis.

3. Findings

3.1. Structure of Data

The Figures 1 to 3 of the distribution of the participant information used according to the variables are presented
below.

Fig 1. Distribution by genders Fig 2. Distribution by education program Fig 3. Distribution by age range
According to the frequencies given in Figure 1, 51.46% of the research subjects are females and 48.54% of them
are males. Number of males are 299 and number of females are 317. This equivalence in the distribution of the
subjects is a good indicator for the statistical analysis. Figure 2 shows the distribution of students according to the
education program. 68.83% of subjects are students of Formal Education Program. The rate of Secondary Education
Programs students is 31.17%. The age ranges of subjects in the study can be seen on Figure 3. 33.60% of the students’
ages are between 20-24 and 42.86% are between 25-29.

Fig. 4 Distribution of subjects according to geographical regions they came from

Due to the geographical location of Gaziantep, it is seen Figure 4 that the proportion of students from
Mediterranean and South eastern Anatolia regions are relatively high. However, number of subjects from each region
12 İbrahim Halil Korkmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18
4 Garah & Audira/ Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

is suitable for applying statistical analysis.

Fig. 5 Distribution of subjects according to classes

According to the Figure 5, it can be seen that the rate of graduated subjects are higher than total of other classes.
This is not unexpected with considering the fact that the Department of Industrial Engineering has been continuing
its educational activities since year 2000.

Fig. 6 Distribution of subjects according to horoscopes

Finally the Figure 6 shows the distribution of students according to horoscopes. According to the figure, horoscope
distribution of subjects can be said to have an approximate homogeneity. Number of subjects for each horoscope is
enough for parametric tests.
3.2 Hypothesis Tests

The first hypothesis of the study was established to test whether there is a significant difference between female
students' and male students'. A t-test was performed to test the hypothesis and the results given below.
 İbrahim Halil Korkmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18 13
Garah & Audira/ Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 5

Table 1. Group statistics of genders

Gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
GPA Male 299 2.4316 .44051 .02548
Female 317 2.5353 .47545 .02670

Table 2. GPA differences of genders

Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval of
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error the Difference
F Sig. t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper
GPA Equal variances
assumed 1.846 .175 -2.802 614 .005 -.10366 .03699 -.17630 -.03102
Equal variances
-2.809 613.80 .005 -.10366 .03691 -.17614 -.03118
not assumed

According to the results of independent sample t-test shown in Table 2, there is a significant difference between
female and male students’ GPA. Table 1 shows that mean of female students’ GPA (2.5353) is higher than males
(2.4316). Hence, Ha0 was rejected.
The second hypothesis of the study was established to test the differences between the academic performance of
formal and secondary education program students. Results of t-test performed to test the hypothesis are shown below
in Table 3 and Table 4.

Table 3. Group statistics of education programs

Educational Program N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
GPA Formal Program 424 2.5169 .45963 .02232
Secondary Program 192 2.4144 .45855 .03309

Table 4. GPA differences according to educational program

Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95% Confidence Interval
of the Difference
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error
F Sig. t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper
GPA Equal variances
.271 .603 2.566 614 .011 .10251 .03995 .02405 .18097
assumed
Equal variances
2.568 369.771 .011 .10251 .03992 .02401 .18100
not assumed

Results given in Table 4 shows that there is a significant difference between the GPA of students of formal
education program and secondary education program. Therefore, Hb0 was rejected. When it comes to the difference,
it can be seen in Table 3 that formal education students’ GPA mean is higher than secondary education students.
Probable academic achievement differences of students according to their geographical belongingness were tested
by the third hypothesis of the research. An ANOVA test was performed to test the hypothesis and results were given
below in Table 5.
Table 5. GPA differences according to geographical regions where subjects came from
GPA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups .324 6 .054 .252 .095
Within Groups 130.590 609 .214
Total 130.914 615
14 İbrahim Halil Korkmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18
6 Garah & Audira/ Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

It can be seen that there are not significant differences between the geographical regions of subjects in GPA.
According to the results shown in Table 5, Hc0 could not been rejected.
The fourth hypothesis of the research was established to test whether there are significant differences between the
GPA points of students according to their age ranges. Results of ANOVA test conducted to test the Hd0 were given
below in Table 6.

Table 6. GPA differences according to age ranges

GPA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 5.258 2 2.629 12.826 .000
Within Groups 125.656 613 .205
Total 130.914 615

As can be seen on the results shown in Table 6, there is a significant difference between the GPA of students age
range groups. According to this result, Hd0 was rejected. Now, it’s necessary to determine which groups differ from
others. Appropriate Post Hoc test required for this to be understood. The homogeneity situation of variances must be
determined for choosing the appropriate Post Hoc test. In this context, results of homogeneity of variances test have
given in Table 7.

Table 7. Test of Homogeneity of Variances

GPA
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
16.426 2 613 .000

Results of the test shows that variances do not distribute homogeneously. In this situation, performing a Games
Howell Post Hoc test is appropriate to determine the differences between the age ranges groups. Table 8 shows the
results of Games Howell Post Hoc test.
Table 8. Multiple comparisons of GPA differences of age ranges groups between each other
Dependent Variable: GPA
Games-Howell

95% Confidence Interval

(I) Age Range (J) Age Range Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound
20-24 25-29 -.21181* .04575 .000 -.3194 -.1042
30+ -.14061* .04817 .010 -.2540 -.0272
25-29 20-24 .21181* .04575 .000 .1042 .3194
30+ .07119 .03945 .170 -.0217 .1641
30+ 20-24 .14061* .04817 .010 .0272 .2540
25-29 -.07119 .03945 .170 -.1641 .0217
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

According to Games Howell test results given in Table 8, age range of 20-24 has significant differences from both
25-29 and 30+ age ranges. Another result of the test is that there is no significant difference between age range 25-
29 and age range 30+. The descriptive statistics show that mean GPA of 20-24 is (2.33), 25-29 is (2.36) and 30+ is
(2.64). In this situation, we can say that academic performance of 30+ and 25-29 age ranges groups are respectively
higher than age range of 20-24. Although a difference of mean GPA between 25-29 and 30+ groups is seen but this
difference is not statistically significant according to results of Games Howell Post Hoc test.
The fifth hypothesis of the research was established to determine whether there are significant differences between
GPA of students according to their classes. ANOVA test results that performed were shown in Table 9 below.

Table 9. GPA differences of subjects according to classes

GPA
 İbrahim Halil Korkmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18 15
Garah & Audira/ Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 7

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 43.042 4 10.761 74.822 .000
Within Groups 87.872 611 .144
Total 130.914 615

According to the results seen in Table 9, there are significant differences between GPA means of classes. On
account of this result, He0 was rejected. It is necessary to perform the appropriate Post Hoc test to determine the
differences of each group and the homogeneity of variances test to decide appropriate Post Hoc test. Table 10 shows
the homogeneity of variances test results.

Table 10. Test of Homogeneity of Variances

GPA
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
3.448 4 611 .008

As seen in Table 10, distribution of groups’ variances is not homogeneous. It is appropriate to perform the Games
Howell Post Hoc test in this situation. Table 11 shows the results of Games Howell Post Hoc test below.

Table 11. Multiple comparisons of GPA differences of classes between each other
Dependent Variable: GPA
Games-Howell
Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval
(I) Class (J) Class (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound
1 2 -.36618* .06248 .000 -.5392 -.1932
3 -.80211* .06594 .000 -.9851 -.6192
4 -.94942* .06400 .000 -1.1268 -.7721
Graduated -.81095* .04873 .000 -.9474 -.6745
2 1 .36618* .06248 .000 .1932 .5392
3 -.43593* .06574 .000 -.6177 -.2542
4 -.58324* .06380 .000 -.7593 -.4071
Graduated -.44477* .04845 .000 -.5789 -.3106
3 1 .80211* .06594 .000 .6192 .9851
2 .43593* .06574 .000 .2542 .6177
4 -.14731 .06719 .189 -.3332 .0386
Graduated -.00884 .05285 1.000 -.1562 .1386
4 1 .94942* .06400 .000 .7721 1.1268
2 .58324* .06380 .000 .4071 .7593
3 .14731 .06719 .189 -.0386 .3332
Graduated .13847 .05041 .054 -.0015 .2785
Graduated 1 .81095* .04873 .000 .6745 .9474
2 .44477* .04845 .000 .3106 .5789
3 .00884 .05285 1.000 -.1386 .1562
4 -.13847 .05041 .054 -.2785 .0015
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

The results of Games Howell Post Hoc test seen on Table 11 shows that mean GPA differences between 3th and
4th classes, 3th and graduated, 4th and graduated are not statistically significant. All of the mean GPA of remaining
classes differ significantly from each other. Descriptive statistics show that mean GPA of 1st classes is (1.78), 2nd
classes (2.15), 3th classes (2.59), 4th classes (2.74) and graduated (2.59). Thus, it is possible to say that 1st, 2nd, 3th
and 4th class subjects academic success are respectively higher than the previous class of each in a statistically
significant manner. Graduated mean GPA is significantly higher than 1st and 2nd classes. Equality of mean GPA of
3th classes and graduated and differences of mean GPA between 3th and 4th classes are not statistically significant.
The sixth and last hypothesis of the research was established to test whether there are differences between mean
GPA of subjects according to their horoscopes. Results of the ANOVA test performed to test the hypothesis shown
in Table 12.
8 Garah & Audira/ Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000
16 İbrahim Halil Korkmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18

Table 12. GPA differences of subjects according to horoscopes

GPA
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups .950 11 .086 .401 .56
Within Groups 129.964 604 .215
Total 130.914 615

It can be seen on the Table 12 that there are not statistically significant differences between the subjects according
to their horoscopes as well. Therefore, could not been Hg0 rejected.

4. Discussion and Conclusion

The study was designed to determine whether the academic achievement of Gaziantep Universities Industrial
Engineering Department students varied according to their various characteristics. As a measure of the students'
academic achievement, Grade Point Averages of them were discussed. Within the scope of the study, 6 hypotheses
have been established to examine whether the students' academic achievement differ according to each of the
characteristics determined. The first hypothesis of the study was established to test whether the GPA was differing
according to the gender variable which was used by many researchers in the literature. As a result of the statistical
test, it was found that female students were significantly more successful than male students. This result, which
coincides with the results of previous studies, confirms that gender is an important factor affecting academic
achievement [36; 15] and that females are more successful than males [29; 16; 23; 26; 3; 1]. In contrast to this studies
and above-mentioned research results, there are different studies that have concluded that men are more successful
(25; 17; 35; 38; 7). This diversity produces a proposal for future researches, with the necessity of repeating the study
in different samples.
Second hypothesis was tested the GPA differences between the students of formal and secondary education
program. According to the results, formal education program students seems significantly a few more successful than
secondary education program students. Secondary education program students go to school in the evening, after
working hours. In this situation, many of these students can be engaged in other jobs during the daytime. Hence, the
result may be thought to be due to the fact that secondary education program students carry more responsibility and
this situation can lower their motivation at school.
Test results of third hypothesis of the study show that there was no significant difference between the academic
achievement of the students according to the geographical regions they came from. Although there are different
studies that evaluate student’s achievements on the basis of their locality and conclude differences between urban
and rural students [19], no significant difference was found between the different regions the students came from as
a result of the study. Although there are differences between geographical regions of Turkey in terms of opportunity
equality, this result is essentially gratifying. The achievement differences between the age ranges of the students were
examined in scope of the study. Results show that age ranges differs significantly from each other and as the students’
ages increase, their academic success levels increase. Remarkably, a significant difference in academic success
between 25-30 and 30+ age ranges could not be found. This result can be interpreted in relation to the increased
sensitivity of people to their responsibilities as they grow up to their 25+ ages. Similar to the results of analysis
performed to determine the academic achievement differences according to the age ranges, students differ from each
other according to the classes in academic success. GPA scores of students increase significantly up to 3th and 4th
classes. After these classes, academic achievement levels do not differ significantly from each other. These two results
of the analysis of two similar variables mentioned here are being confirmed by each other.
The last and (maybe) the most interesting variable of the study was horoscope of the students. Outputs of the
analysis performed to determine whether there are significant differences between the academic success of students
according to their horoscopes show that the result is negative. Students’ GPA degrees do not differ significantly from
each other in this context. Even though it may be disappointing for people who believe that everybody have different
characteristics in terms of their horoscopes, this result suggest that people should consider factors other than
horoscopes in making decisions. It is necessary to emphasize the main limitations of the study. This study was carried
out by using only the data of Gaziantep University students. In addition, the results produced are solely related to
 İbrahim Halil Korkmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18 17
Garah & Audira/ Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000 9

Industrial Engineering students. Although the data used in the analysis of the study are sufficient for the application
of parametric tests, it is more useful for the generalizability of the results to apply the methodology in different
populations and make comparisons.

References
[1] Abu-Hola, I. (2005) Uncovering Gender Differences in Science Achievement and Attitudes towards Science for Jordanian Primary Pupils.
Damascus University Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 19-53.
[2] Ali, N., Jusoff, K., Ali, S., Mokhtar, N. and Salamt, A. S. A. (2009) The Factors Influencing Students’ Performance at Universiti Teknologi
MARA Kedah, Malaysia. Canadian Research & Development Center of Sciences and Cultures, Vol.3 No.4.
[3] Al-Mously, N., Salem, R. and Al-Hamdan, N. (2013) The impact of gender and English language on the academic performance of students:
An experience from new Saudi medical school. Journal of Contemporary Medical Education, Vol. 6 Issue 1, pp. 170-6.
[4] Bahadır, F., Tuncer, M., Akmence, A. E., Dikmen, M., Şimşek, M. (2018) Ders Akademik Başarılarının Mesleki Programı Yordama
Durumunun Değerlendirilmesi. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Vol. 11 No. 61, pp. 635-643.
[5] Bakan, İ. and Güler, B. (2017) Duygusal Zekanın Yaşam Doyumu ve Akademik Başarıya Etkileri ve Demografik Özellikler Bağlamında Algı
Farklılıkları. KMÜ Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 19 (33), pp. 1-11.
[6] Ballatine, J. H. (1993) The sociology of education: A systematic analysis. Englwood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
[7] Bassey, S. W., Joshua, M. T. and Asim, A. E. (2011) Gender Differences and Mathematics Achievement of Rural Senior Secondary Students
in Cross River State, Nigeria. Mathematics Connection, Vol. 10, pp. 56- 60.
[8] Battle, J., and Lewis, M. (2002) The increasing significance of class: The relative effects of race and socioeconomic status on academic
achievement. Journal of Poverty, 6(2), pp. 21-35.
[9] Bloom, S. B. (1998) İnsan Nitelikleri ve Okulda Öğrenme. (Çev. Prof. Dr. Durmuş Ali Özçelik), İstanbul: MEB Yayınları.
[10] Carter, V. and Good, E. (1973) Dictionary of Education. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York.
[11] Chambers, E. A., and Schreiber, J. B. (2004) Girls’ academic achievement: Varying associations of extracurricular activities. Gender and
Education, 16(3), pp. 327-346.
[12] Collis, J. and Hussey, R. (2003) Business research (2nd Ed. ed.: Palgrave Macmillan).
[13] Crosnoe, R., Johnson, M. K., and Elder, G. H. (2004) School size and the interpersonal side of education: An examination of race/ethnicity
and organizational context. Social Science Quarterly, 85(5), pp. 1259- 1274.
[14] Cuevas, A., Febrero, M. and Fraiman, R. (2004) An anova test for functional data. Computational Statistics&Data Analysis, Vol. 47 Issue 1,
pp. 111-122.
[15] Dania P.O. (2014) Effect of gender on students academic achievement in secondary school social studies. Journal of Educational Practises,
Vol. 5, pp. 78-84.
[16] Deepak K.K., Al-Umran K. U., Al-Sheikh M. H. and Al-Rubaish A. (2011) The influence of gender on undergraduate performance in multiple
choice testing in clinical disciplines at University of Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Al Ameen Journal of Medical Sciences, Vol. 4, pp. 123-30.
[17] Doris, A., Neill, D. O. and Sweetman, O. (2013) Gender, Single-Sex Schooling and Maths Achievement. Economics of Education Review,
Vol. 35, pp. 104-19.
[18] Eitle, T. M. (2005) Do gender and race matter? Explaining the relationship between sports participation and achievement. Sociological
Spectrum, 25(2), pp. 177-195.
[19] Faisal, R., Shinwari, L. and Hussain, S. S. (2017) Academic performance of male in comparison with female undergraduate medical students
in Pharmacology examinations. Journal of Medical Sciences, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 205-208.
[20] Farooq, M. S., Chaundhry, M. S. and Berhanu, G. (2011) Factors Affecting Students’ Academic Performance: A Case of Secondary School
Level. Journal of Quality and Technology Management, Vol VII, Issue II, pp. 01-14.
[21] Green, A.L. (2000) The Perceived Motivation for Academic Achievement Among African American College Students. The Florida State
University.
[22] Hansen, Joe B. (2000) Student Performance and Student Growth as measure of success: A evaluator’s perspective. Paper presented at annual
meeting of the American Educational Research Association New Orleans, Louisiana, April 25.
[23] Hedjazi, Y. and Omidi, M. (2008) Factors affecting the academic success of agricultural students at university of Tehran. Iran Journal of
Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Vol. 10, pp. 205-14.
[24] Hijazi, S. T. and Naqvi, S.M.M.R. (2006) Factors Affecting Students’ Performance: A Case of Private Colleges. Bangladesh e-Journal of
Sociology, Vol. 3, No 1.
[25] Josiah, O. and Adejoke, E. O. (2014) Effect of Gender, Age and Mathematics Anxiety on College Students' Achievement in Algebra. American
Journal of Education Research, Vol. 2, pp. 474-6.
[26] Khwaileh F. M. and Zaza, H. I. (2011) Gender differences in academic performance among undergraduates at the University of Jordan: are
they real or stereotyping. College Student Journal, Vol. 45, pp. 722-735.
[27] McCoy, L. P. (2005) Effect of demographic and personal variables on achievement in eighth grade algebra. Journal of Educational Research,
98 (3), pp. 131-135.
18 İbrahim Halil Korkmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019) 9–18
10 Garah & Audira/ Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

[28] Mushtaq, I. and Khan S. N. (2012) Factors Affecting Students’ Academic Performance. Global Journal of Management and Business Research,
Vol. 12 Issue 9, pp. 17-22.
[29] Okafor C.A. and Egbon O. (2011) Academic performance of male versus female accounting undergraduate students: evidence from Nigeria.
Higher Education Studies, Vol. 1, pp. 9-19.
[30] Peng, S. S., & Hall, S. T. (1995) Understanding racial-ethnic differences in secondary school science and mathematics achievement (NCES
No. 95710). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education.
[31] Poropt, A. E. (2011) The eysenckain Personality Factors And their correlation with academic performance. Brithish Journal of Education
Pschology, 81, pp.41-58.
[32] Saxton, J. (2000) Investment in education: Private and public returns. Retrieved from http://www.house.gov/jec/educ.pdf.
[33] Sığrı, Ü. and Gürbüz, S. (2011). Akademik başarı ve kişilik ilişkisi: Üniversite öğrencileri üzerinde bir araştırma. Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi,
10(1), pp. 30-48.
[34] Slovin E. (1960) Slovin's formula for sampling technique. Retrieved on April, 30, 2019.
[35] Tasisa, W. and Tafesse, T. (2013) Gender Disparity in Academic Achievements in Ethiopian Colleges of Teacher Education. International
Journal of Social Science and Education, Vol. 3, pp. 808-22.
[36] Trick LR, Davis S, Wolf BB and Hirata M. (1988) A comparison of academic performance of female and male optometry students at the
University of Missouri-St. Louis. Journal of American Optomoletry Association, Vol. 59, pp. 89- 92.
[37] Turkish Language Associaton (TDK), (2017). Türkçe sözlük. http://www.tdk.gov.tr/
[38] Udida, A. L., Ukwayi, J. K. and Ogodo, A. F. (2012) Parental Socioeconomic Background as a Determinant of Student's Academic Performance
in Selected Public Secondary Schools in Calabar Municipal Local Government Area, Cross River State, Nigeria. Journal of Education and
Practice, Vol. 3 No. 16, pp. 129-35.