Effect of A Resilience Programme Through Group Dynamics on the Academic Problems of Grade 7 Students, Chiang Mai University Demonstration School
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Early adolescents may encounter adverse situations that could cause stress and anxiety. To prevent mental health problems and promote mental health, resilience should be promoted in early adolescents. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to develop a resilience program and evaluate the effectiveness of such a programme on the academic problems of Grade 7 students of the Chiang Mai University Demonstration School, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Methods: This quantitative research used a quasi-experimental design, which was a controlled study with a pretest and post-test. The purposive selection was used to choose 70 participants from the Grade 7 students, the academic year 2021 from the Chiang Mai University Demonstration School. The criteria were students who had the lowest resilience inventory score from the student population. The participants were classified with stratified random sampling into the experimental groups (n=35), who received a resilience program through the group’s dynamics once a week for 11 weeks at 60 minutes each time, and the control groups (n=35), who received a resilience knowledge sheet and had a normal life. Two participants in each group withdrew, leaving a total of 33 participants per group. The data were collected by assessing before and after participating in the programme with a general information questionnaire, the Canadian Occupational Performance Measures (COPM), and Resilience Inventory. Descriptive statistical analysis, an independent t-test, and paired t-test were used to analyse the data. Results: This resilience programme had an overall consistency index of 0.78. After treatment, the experimental group and control group had a statistically significant difference in the pretest and post-test resilience scores. (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05). The experimental group had pretest and post-test significant differences in academic performance and satisfaction (p < 0.01), while the control group had no statistically significant difference. There was a statistically significant difference in the post-test academic satisfaction between both groups. (p < 0.01), while academic performance displayed no statistically significant difference. Conclusion: This resilience programme, through the groups’ dynamics could contribute to the resilience, academic performance, and academic satisfaction on academic problems.
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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