MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1613897748 · doi:10.22329/jtl.v8i1.3069

Implementation of a Strengths-Based Approach to Teaching in an Elementary School

2012· article· en· W1613897748 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Teaching and Learning · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionClass (philosophy)Strengths and weaknessesPerspective (graphical)Intervention (counseling)Mathematics educationPsychologyMental healthPedagogySocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schools play a significant role in addressing children’s mental health needs and this article contends that schools can further contribute to student mental well-being by adopting a strengths perspective model. A specific strengths assessment and treatment model is presented that extends to individual, peer and group interventions as well as discussions within the classroom that is applicable to every student in the school and not only students considered ‘at risk’. By engaging an entire class, or indeed an entire school, in a dialogue of strengths, the concept of strengths can become a part of the culture of the school and lead to a positive school environment. This article provides an overview of the model, its implementation in a school, including the theory informing the interventions, followed by two brief case studies showing how the model was applied in a classroom. The intervention not only transforms the way in which educators interact with students, but it changes the way students perceive themselves and the manner in which they perceive their own potential.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.411 · 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