MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155617399 · doi:10.7202/1020976ar

Classroom Behaviour Management: The effects of in-service training on elementary teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs

2013· article· en· W2155617399 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nancy Gaudreau, Égide Royer, Éric Frénette, Claire Beaumont, Tara Flanagan

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelf-efficacyPsychologyClassroom managementTraining (meteorology)School teachersControl (management)Medical educationMathematics educationSocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined a training program in classroom management in relation to the efficacy beliefs of elementary school teachers. The training program used a quasi-experimental design with a waitlist control group. Twenty-seven elementary school teachers in the greater Quebec City area participated. The repeated measures ANOVA results revealed positive effect of the program on teachers’ personal teaching efficacy beliefs, and in the teachers’ perceived self-efficacy in managing difficult behaviours in the classroom. A group by time interaction effect was also observed with regard to the teachers’ perceived self-efficacy in eliciting principals’ support where participating teachers were more confident in their interactions with principals at follow-up. Factors that influence the development of self-efficacy beliefs of teachers and implications for practice are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.398
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.029 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations33
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGillSame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207