Self-Regulation of Middle School Students With Learning Disabilities During a Complex Project-Based Science Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-regulation is widely considered important for the academic success of students. Yet, there is limited research about how students self-regulate during complex, long-term learning tasks, such as the project-based learning activities that commonly occur as part of science classroom instruction. There is also less known about how atypical learners, including students with learning disabilities (LD), self-regulate academic tasks. The current multiple case study explores these gaps in the research base through an investigation of how middle school students with language-based LDs self-regulated their learning during a complex, science-based project—creation of computerized serious educational games (SEG) about renewable energy sources. Findings from the current study suggest that there is a relationship between attributions that students with LD make for their performance and their self-efficacy for learning, but only under specific conditions. The role of this relationship seems to diminish when a student poorly calibrates perception of ability relative to actual performance and when a student perceives the cost of effort to outweigh the benefit.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".