MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1590104315

Good bye burnout, hello me: individual strategies of self-care among Saskatchewan teachers

2011· article· en· W1590104315 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew McCaw

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicTechnostress in Professional Settings
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutAttritionPsychologyQualitative researchMedical educationHealth careNursingMedicineClinical psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teachers with less than five years teaching experience have a high attrition rate. This high rate has financial, organizational and instructional consequences, such as school divisions that must recruit and train replacements, and students who lose the value of being taught by teachers who have gained experience in the profession. Self-care is a factor that curbs attrition, however, little is known about the personal and professional strategies of self-care for teachers. The Delphi method was used to identify and understand the self-care strategies used by Saskatchewan schoolteachers. Fourteen participants with five or more years of teaching experience and from nine different school divisions in Saskatchewan contributed to the study. Each participant responded through two rounds of online questionnaires about his or her self-care practices. Self-care is associated with well-being and it is the individual teacher that can take steps to cultivate and maintain personal health. Data were analyzed using SurveyMonkey and NVIVo 9 qualitative analysis software programs, and Skovholt’s theoretical model of self; strategies and themes were identified. A visual representation of participant’s responses was developed. The most common self-care strategies identified were talking with friends and family, healthy eating, discussing events from the classroom with support system at school, drinking water, and volunteering. The findings are described alongside implications for teachers and other helping professionals as well as future research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library - University of Saskatchewan (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicTechnostress in Professional SettingsFrench-language works237,207