¶ … Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparisons." One needs to discuss learning because a link has occurred between motivation as well as achievement in any given school setting. The studies question was how to facilitate perception of efficacy in the classroom setting. He or she has to note that this inquiry does have much merit. This is because one seeks to find the answers through looking at various personal attributes that do include strategies for one's learners (Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.). From looking at this study, one has to believe that the authors failed to give the reader a clear hypotheses as well as predictions with his or her work. This means that one will not know how to replicate it because of the evidence no longer appears present for anyone to use within this published article. One would think that at least three are mentioned, including one that could become null, but that is not the case. This is quite disturbing when analyzing the details because one has no way of coming up with a means to predict what took place then in order to replicate it now (Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.).

By having any kind of hypothesis, one is predicting something; however, the authors fail to do this with their work. No one is able to solve life's dilemmas' if it is not present in their manuscript, which can make it difficult to learn from them in an efficient manner. Regardless, these are both needed, and at this point wonder how well they did on their research in order to make it work for the public to understand. One will take a look at the independent and dependent variables in depth

(Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.).

One has to note that the independent and dependent variables are not clearly described with this particular study. The authors describe internal and external comparisons, but do not give information for a person to know how each aspect is going to get done throughout the research. This makes it frustrating for the person reviewing the article because there is no means of actually replicating their work for future reference. For example, all that is mentioned about the purpose of the study is as follows

(Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.).

was to extend the literature by assessing student use of internal and external comparisons in forming efficacy perceptions of self-regulated learning (ESRL) across English and mathematics content domains (Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The

Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.).

The theoretical framework is understandable. The authors do a literature review for the reader to understand what it is they are trying to study, and shows evidence that there is a correlation between English and Math for a correlation to exist between the two subject areas. In essence, by looking at both of these matters, one learns that positive effects do occur between these subjects when done externally; however, with those that are internally, this is considered negative, especially for the ESRL aspect of this particular study (Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.). However, through the combination of the two, one learns that each cancels one another out, which makes the correlation at zero "between the English and math ESRL components" (Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.). All of this makes complete sense to the audience when studying this particular article on learning perceptions.

2) Methods (3 pages)

One needs to analyze the methods in this article. The first issue that arises is that the sample is not that adequate. For example, the researcher fails to give the locations in which the study took place in order for others to replicate or expand on their work. They give the number of females and males that participated; however, the numbers are not the same. In essence, the females outdo the males by at least 48. This does not make the study fair equal and accurate, which easily skews the results in the beginning based off what is found through the author's results. For example, every researcher knows that it is needed to keep both genders as close to the same numbers as possible, but...

This was not done well either. One needs to note that authors did manage to actually have a variety of instruments to draw from in order that each of them strives to get some kind of results. However, this was probably the strongest point in their work that was published. They did fail to discuss how they went about getting their sample needed in order to do the research. All that was mentioned was nine seminars, but an individual would want to know what other means were used to make this happen for everyone. When reading the information, a person would like to know how each person was selected. Did each person have to go through a series of tests? How did the researcher make it fair? None of these were answered in the article, which makes it frustrating for everyone involved trying to learn from it (Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.).
The next area worth mentioning is that of adequacy of procedures. One would have to note that these procedures are not fully accurate in it. The researchers use college entrance examinations, and focus in on those that are middle class. This does not make it fair for those who are rich or poor that may want to participate in the study. By looking at the information provided, an individual can believe that it has many flaws. The researchers obviously want to study self-regulated learning; however, those particular tests focus in on science and history as well. These can make their testing quite inaccurate when trying to figure out a way in which to help learn from others who is studying the subjects themselves. What would have made it more interesting is having a control group and an actual group that gets to study in advance. This would have made it quite interesting by learning how they study, and the test scores that resulted from it. Furthermore, all of how this was done was not professional and not as organized as one would expect (Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.).

Another one that is important pertains to the adequacy of materials/instruments. These are quite accurate; however, the issue that arises is that of bias when analyzing them to get the necessary results. The researchers did the right thing by having more than one to use for their project, which makes it nearly perfect on the outcomes. Each was self-administered, so that possibly means that the investigators provided the directions for the participants to complete it. This was done at their own discretion. On the other hand, the downfall occurs when the investigators did not provide a consent form or mention one for them to no the benefits and risks of the study. For all one may know is that anyone who went to a college entrance examination, he or she was automatically put in the pool for partaking, whether or not he or she wanted to at that particular time (Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.).

One needs to identify the major threats to internal and external validity. This is accurate because of all the tests that were conducted to make this happen. For example, the researchers used Bandura as a part of their surveys/questionnaires for the participants involved in the study. The best form of validity was that of concurrent. This is because the investigators were trying to find a correlation between English and Math. One has to believe that more than one subject is needed to find if there is more a correlation between all or some of them, instead of studying two for this particular study. Each measure was obtained when the test scores were done with the research. Furthermore, the internal validity is inaccurate because of some level of bias is present with this research. Not only that, but not enough information is provided for one to attempt to do it themselves in the future in order to study the behavior of students in the classroom setting (Forming Self-Regulated Learning Perceptions: The Influence of Internal and External Comparison, n.d.).

With the adequacy of the analysis, this is worth considering. This part is also somewhate accurate because a person is able to make a sound decision based off…