Instrumental enrichment and locus of control, self-esteem, behaviour and academic performance in grade five
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a quasi-experimental design, this study examined the effect of a four and a half month program of Instrumental Enrichment (Feuerstein, 1980) on students' self-esteem, measured by Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory (Coopersmith, 1967/1991); perception of academic locus of control, measured by Intellectual Achievement Responsibility Scale (Crandall, Katkovsky, & Crandall, 1965); behaviour, measured by Teacher Student Behaviour Checklist (Schneider, 1994); and academic performance, measured by teacher selected written class work. The treatment group (n = 14) of grade five students from an existing pullout learning assistance class and the control group (n = 23) attended two different inner-city elementary (K-7) schools in Vancouver, B.C. In the twice weekly 45 minute lessons, (approximately 15 hours total) the Learning Assistance teacher taught Organization of Dots and Orientation in Space instruments of IE. Results indicated a statistically significant change in behaviour (F(1,34) = 6.21 p_ < .02) favouring the treatment group. A second finding linked the locus of control and behaviour raw change scores (.62, p_ < .01). The academic performance data were too dissimilar for comparison purposes. Design improvements include: longer treatment time, similar settings for treatment and control groups (ie both closed or both open-area), monitoring of bridging activities, more effective researcher control over work used for academic assessment.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".