Examining culturally diverse learners’ motivation and engagement processes as situated in the context of a complex task
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
Student learning processes, including motivation and engagement, have been identified as malleable and situated in context. We have limited understanding about how to enhance motivation and engagement processes for culturally diverse learners in today’s multicultural classrooms. To support thinking about that challenge, this work built on research on both culturally responsive teaching (CRT) and self-regulated learning (SRL), each of which identifies pedagogical practices that enhance student engagement and motivation. This study examined how students at a culturally diverse independent elementary school in the West Coast of Canada participated in classroom context that integrated CRT and SRL-promoting practices. Specifically, this study examined culturally diverse learners’ engagement and motivation during a complex learning task. Data collected included classroom observations, practice records and documents, students’ work samples, and student interviews and student surveys. The results demonstrated: (1) above medium levels of engagement and motivation, among participants, that varied across specific contexts; and (2) associations between culturally diverse learners’ engagement and motivation; and complex learning context such as CRT and SRL-promoting practices. Implications for future research on culturally diverse students’ engagement as well as designing a complex task that integrated a culturally responsive teaching and self-regulated learning pedagogical practices to support engagement and motivation are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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