MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3024256755 · doi:10.53841/bpsecp.2018.35.4.19

Consolidation and development

2018· article· en· W3024256755 sur OpenAlexaff
Peter Portwood

Notice bibliographique

RevueEducational and Child Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueChild and Adolescent Health
Établissements canadiensSt. Peter's Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésOfficerEconomic shortageChristian ministrySocial workPsychologyNational serviceService (business)Consolidation (business)Social WelfareGovernment (linguistics)Medical educationMedicinePolitical scienceManagementLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The 1950s were a period of consolidation after the upsets of the war years, and the continuing staff shortages up to the end of the 1940s. In 1952 the section of the Annual Report of the Chief School Medical Officer on child guidance in Sheffield was for the first time attributed to the Psychologist in Charge, Mr N. Whilde who had occupied the post since 1940. He notes that the referrals to the service had settled down to a pattern that changed little from one year to the next - boys were referred more than girls, a ratio of around 2:1; schools referred more than 50 per cent of cases and in terms of difficulties; Intellectual and behavioural difficulties accounted for around 80 per cent of referrals. The report also notes that for the first time in many years the service had a psychiatric social worker. The 1953 report notes that for the first time since 1945 the service was fully staffed. However, this was short-lived as two educational psychologists and a social worker resigned at the end of the year. For most of 1954 the service was one psychologist short and had no social workers. There was a vacancy for a senior psychologist, but with no suitable applicants, an assistant psychologist was appointed. At a national level in 1950 the government had commissioned a committee to look at treatment and provision for maladjusted children. Under the chairmanship of Dr Underwood, the committee produced their report that was published in 1955 (Ministry of Education, 1955). The committee consisted of 17 members, mainly medical doctors working in school medical services, a few head teachers and just one psychologist. Dr Alexander, Sheffield’s Chief Education Officer (see Chapter 1) gave evidence to the committee on behalf of the Association of LEAs, and Mr N. Whilde gave evidence on the incidence of maladjustment in the area covered by the Sheffield clinic (Sheffield, West Riding, Rotherham and Doncaster). Sheffield was well represented. Amongst its many recommendations, the Underwood Report recommended that all LEAs should have a child guidance clinic with an educational psychologist, psychiatrist and a social worker, and that each should have a school psychological service. It also wanted child guidance clinics to accept referrals of all individuals up to the age of 18, whether or not they were in full-time education. The report suggested that across England and Wales 280 educational psychologists would be needed to work in child guidance clinics, as well as those posts within school psychological services. They noted the need for an expansion of training in psychology at undergraduate level as well as in the postgraduate training of educational psychologists. The staff shortages in the Sheffield child guidance clinic and school psychological service described above continued throughout the 1950s. An advertised post for a senior psychologist in 1954 failed to attract any suitable applicants, and instead a newly qualified psychologist, Peter Portwood, was appointed as assistant psychologist. Peter remained in the service until 1959 when he moved to Cornwall to become the senior psychologist there, and eventually Principal Educational Psychologist, taking up some important posts in the BPS Division of Education and Child Psychology. His account of the Sheffield Service was written in the 1990s and appears below. Peter died in 2005.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,146
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,066
Tête enseignante GPT0,463
Écart entre enseignants0,397 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEducational and Child PsychologyMême sujetChild and Adolescent HealthTravaux en français237 207