MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136385538 · doi:10.22230/ijepl.2008v3n5a70

A Study of Counselors' Legal Challenges and Their Perceptions of Their Ability to Respond

2008· article· en· W2136385538 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Debra G. Leggett, Theodore P. Remley

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Education Policy and Leadership · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationLicensurePerceptionMedical educationPsychologyEngineering ethicsMedicinePolitical scienceLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors explore the results of a study that assessed the types and frequency of legal issues encountered by counselors and counselors’ perceptions of their ability to respond to these issues. They also assessed whether the participants’ perceptions were related to practice setting, years of experience, completion of a course in ethics, recent completion of continuing education in ethics or legal issues, state licensure status, certification by the National Board of Certified Counselors (NBCC), and highest degree earned. Results demonstrate that counselors feel most prepared to deal with situations encountered most often, but that school counselors do not feel as prepared to face most ethical and legal issues.

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 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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Education Policy and LeadershipSame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207