Goal setting and reflection as a tool for children summer camp
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This research was conducted to study the impact of goal setting and reflection used during summer camp. To be specific, to find whether or not there are any improvements possible by using these methods for the Get Wild! summer camp located in British Columbia, Canada. We, adults, use these methods almost daily, in everyday life. However, there are not many practices with children despite its importance. \n \nThe Get Wild! summer camp did not have any similar activities included in their program so far. For that reason, they welcomed the idea very much. As they are an educational organization working with children for many years, they understood the potential of such development. They agreed on our cooperation to develope a goal setting and reflection sessions in order to improve their summer camps. \n \nIt was necessary to find out what the coordinators are in need of improving. A questionnaire was constructed with questions targeting the outcome. The result was heavily feedback- and communication-oriented, as coordinators desired to know more about the camp from the children perspective. After collecting the answers from the first questionnaire, a short interview was conducted. This interview served a purpose of communicating more details between the researcher and the coordinators before the summer camp officially started. \nThe very first two weeks of the camp were strictly about an observation. This step helped to narrow down the structure of the week. \n \nThe development result consisted of one goal setting session and one reflection session per week. To help keeping the data from each week, an excel sheets were introduced to the coordinators. They transcribed each child’s goal and reflection session. On top of that, they reported in a separate excel sheet about the past week. Another data collecting method were two questionnaires that were sent to the coordinators. It served a purpose to be able to compare the data from before the implementation and after. The last data collecting method was an observation during the summer camp. \n \nThe implementation of this study was successful. The coordinators reported that the receiving feedback and communication element improved during their summer camp. Other observations were made about more benefits from this development work for children and the coordinators. \nThere is still space for more improvement and further study in this field. More unexplored theories and ideas crossed the mind as, for example, the educational part of such practices could have been involved more.
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 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 | 0,000 | 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».