The impact of reasons for attending university on academic resourcefulness and adjustment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is a well-known phenomenon that generally resourceful students are more likely to employ specific self-control skills, such as academic resourcefulness, to overcome stressors in their life, and as a result, are more likely to be better adjusted, to receive higher grades, and to remain in university than their less resourceful counterparts. To what extent the reasons students attend university further explains academic resourcefulness and why some students fail to persevere with academic challenges were examined in this study. A sample of 481 undergraduate students completed scales assessing general and academic resourcefulness, academic self-efficacy, explanatory style, university adaptation, and reasons for attending university. Students were also asked questions concerning retention, and expected and past grade performance. The results showed that students attending university for more internal reasons and less so to please others and to delay responsibilities uniquely contributed to higher levels of academic resourcefulness. Insight as to why some students may attribute academic failure to lack of effort and personal ability, be less adjusted, decide to leave university, and be expecting and attaining lower grades is provided.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it