(Solved): Using Table 5 (correlation table) above. 1. What is the sample size and where did you find it? ...

Using Table 5 (correlation table) above.

1. What is the sample size and where did you find it?

2. What is the correlation between elaboration strategies and math self-efficacy (list the number)? Is it weak, moderate, or strong? Is it significant? How did you know? State in words what this correlation means.

3. What is the correlation between disciplinary climate and teacher support (list the number)? Is it weak, moderate, or strong? Is it significant? How did you know? State in words what this correlation means.

4. What is one critique to be said of the table as reading and digesting the table?

5. After reading the written paragraph of correlational findings below. What is at least 1 critique that can be said of the written results.

Model 1 This model predicted preference for learning strategies from gender, ethnicity and socio-economic status. For control strategies, results revealed significant effects of Table 5. Correlations among learning strategy preference scales, learning style preference scales, classroom climate scales, math self-efficacy and socio-economic status. Note: $n=4633$. *Correlation is significant at .01 , two-tailed. Results Correlational findings The correlation matrix for all continuous variables included in this study is presented in Table 5. Using Cohen's (1992) guidelines for interpretation of correlation coefficients, bivariate correlations in Table 5 show strong correlations among the three outcomes, $r?.4$; moderate correlation between the two learning style preferences and between the two control variables, $r?.3$; weak correlation between classroom climate scales, $r?.2$. The outcome scales were associated moderate-to-strong with learning style preferences, and weak-to-moderate with classroom climate scales and control variables. The pattern of associations showed that the coefficient of correlation among the predictors ranged from 0 to .38 raising the concern that multicollinearity could be an issue. In order to guard against this possibility, variance inflation factors (VIF) were calculated for the predictors in all seven models. In all cases VIF values were less than $5(\max (\mathrm{VIF})=1.13)$ suggesting that multicollinearity was not a serious issue. Multiple regression findings Models 1 through 4 predicted preference for learning strategy preference from demographic variables, mathematics self-efficacy, for learning style preferences and classroom climate. Results for these models are presented in Tables 6-8 for control, elaboration and memorisation strategies, respectively. All three learning strategy variables were standardised to have a mean of 0 and a standard deviation of 1 .