Health promoting schools: consensus, strategies, and potential
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to summarize a consensus statement generated on the current challenges, strategies, and potential of health promoting schools (HPS) at a 2011 colloquium at the Stellenbosch Institute for Advanced Study where 40 people from five continents came together to share their global and regional experience surrounding theWorld Health Organization (WHO) HPS model. Design/methodology/approach - Using the consensus as its foundation, this review summarizes the underlying educational and social science concepts and factors that contribute to success or failure of HPS, and incorporates peer reviewed papers based on invited presentations at the colloquium and key related literature. Findings - HPS increase knowledge and develop behaviors that benefit the health of children, such schools are also an investment in the well-being of the larger community. Importantly for their long-term psychological health "resilience" is generated by effective HPS programs. Professional development initiatives within schools can catalyze greater absorption of the healthy school approach and focus on best practices. Promotion, support, and evaluation of programs are aided by award schemes and oversight by local or national agencies. And significant educational benefits are accrued for trainees from centers of higher learning involved in HPS program delivery. Practical implications - Educational initiatives that utilize the relative simplicity, low cost, and inherent flexibility of the HPS model can address many significant issues facing today's children. HPS offer an innovative and participatory way to increase the likelihood of the next generation becoming aware of practical ways to positively influence their lifestyle and future well-being. Successful programs are usually those that are relevant, resonate with students, and engage school communities so that they choose to "own" and sustain their program. Originality/value - The consensus statement provides a benchmark of the current status of HPS, and outlines future directions for this model of health promotion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.096 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".