A Longitudinal Exploration of the Academic and Psychosocial Outcomes of Students with Emotional/Behavioural Difficulties: The Importance of Student Perceptions of Themselves, Their Peer Relationships, and Their Classrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Students with emotional/behavioural difficulties (E/BD) continue to experience poor academic and psychosocial outcomes. Developing a better understanding of the ways in which indicators of these outcomes develop while students are still in early grades can assist in planning effective programming and alter negative trajectories. Accordingly, the present study sought to explore the perceptions of students with and without E/BD regarding their self-concept, classroom climate, and academic achievement over the course of one school year. The participants consisted of 68 elementary-aged students attending two schools in Northwestern Ontario. A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted and a number of significant differences were found both between groups and over time. Specifically, students in the E/BD group experienced poorer functioning compared to students without E/BD at most time points. Patterns of change in psychosocial and academic variables were largely similar across groups. Discussions of these findings, as well as implications for practice and for future research are presented. Keywords: Emotional/behavioural difficulties; self-concept; academic achievement
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".