MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042037207 · doi:10.1002/pits.20448

Principles of sustainable prevention: Designing scale‐up of School‐wide Positive Behavior Support to promote durable systems

2009· article· en· W2042037207 on OpenAlexaff
Kent McIntosh, Kevin J. Filter, Joanna Bennett, Charlotte Ryan, George Sugai

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology in the Schools · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityPositive behavior supportPsychologyScale (ratio)Identification (biology)Prevention scienceBehavior changeManagement scienceEngineering ethicsProcess managementSocial psychologyEngineeringPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this article, we provide an overview of School‐wide Positive Behavior Support (SWPBS), an approach to building protective school cultures and preventing the development of problem behavior through instruction, environmental redesign, and attention to systems‐level variables. We define the critical features of SWPBS within a prevention science lens, including identification of its conceptual foundations, proximal mediators of student outcomes, and current research base and goals. Given its evidence of effectiveness, we describe efforts and a research agenda in the area of sustainability of SWPBS, including a description of a proposed model of sustainability and a case study of statewide implementation with steps taken to promote sustained implementation. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations180
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology in the SchoolsSame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207