Is school participation good for children? Associations with health and wellbeing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose There is increasing recognition of children's abilities to speak for themselves. School democracy, as demonstrated by genuine participation, has the potential to benefit both teachers and students; leading to better relationships and improved learning experiences. The aim of this study is to investigate whether participation in schools in Ireland is linked with perceived academic performance, liking school and positive health perceptions. Design/methodology/approach Data were collected via self‐completion questionnaires from a stratified random sample of 10,334 students aged 10‐17 years in Irish schools. The questions included encouragement to express their views in class, participation in the organisation of school events; taking part in making school rules; liking school, perceived academic performance, self‐rated health, life satisfaction and self‐reported happiness. Associations between school participation and other measures were expressed by odds ratios from logistic regression models, conducted separately for girls and boys. Findings More than 63 per cent of participating students reported that they were encouraged to express their views in class, 58 per cent that they were involved in organising school events and 22 per cent that they had been involved in making school rules. All forms of participation were lower among older students. Participation in school was significantly associated with liking school and higher perceived academic performance, better self‐rated health, higher life satisfaction and greater reported happiness. Research limitations/implications These data are all cross‐sectional and relationships cannot imply causality. Practical implications These findings underscore the relevance of school participation for students in Ireland. Originality/value The paper illustrates that, in general, positive relationships between school participation and health and wellbeing are demonstrated among Irish children.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".