MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767417660 · doi:10.1177/0829573517739085

A Preliminary Component Analysis of Self-Regulated Strategy Development for Persuasive Writing in Grades 5 to 7 in British Columbia

2017· article· en· W2767417660 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rhonda Geres-Smith, Sterett H. Mercer, Catherine Archambault, Jamie M. Bartfai

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWriting and Handwriting Education
Canadian institutionsCapital Regional DistrictMcGill UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNational Association of School Psychologists
KeywordsPsychologyContext (archaeology)Replication (statistics)Intervention (counseling)Meta-analysisDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) has extensive evidence of improving student writing; however, few studies have investigated the relative importance of specific self-regulation components in SRSD. Twelve students in Grades 5 to 7 were assigned to one of two, 5-week SRSD conditions for persuasive writing that differed in instruction on the use of self-statements. No differences in outcomes were found between SRSD conditions, but large gains in writing quality, composition duration, and writing self-efficacy were found in both conditions. Although limited by not including a no-intervention comparison condition, the observed gains were typical of effect sizes reported in meta-analyses of SRSD and provide some additional evidence of replication in independent research teams and in a Canadian context.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.741

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicWriting and Handwriting EducationFrench-language works237,207