MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2287997755

Barriers to Learning: The Case for Integrated Mental Health Services in Schools

2016· article· en· W2287997755 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marcella Ogenchuk

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthReading (process)Public relationsPsychologySociologyPedagogyPolitical sciencePsychiatryLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

D. S. Lean & V. A. Colucci (2010). Barriers to learning: The case for integrated mental health services in schools. Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Education. 120 pp., ISBN 978-1-60709-638-2 (paperback) Barriers to Learning: The Case for Integrated Mental Health Services in Schools, which brings timely attention to the issue of increasing pediatric mental health problems, presents a need for integrated mental health resources in the school setting. The title of this book accurately summarizes the focus of the work: the issues that impede student learning and the solutions necessary to improve student achievement. Although Michael Fullan, in his preface, suggests that this book is a must read for education reformers, I would encourage a read by individuals interested in pediatric health and education. As the authors point out, silos exist in the present education system and creating understanding of the barriers among concerned stakeholders and their agencies can be achieved by reading this book. The book, well organized into seven chapters, begins with a prologue where the authors capture the attention of the readers by presenting a vivid and realistic depiction of a typical school day in a non-integrated school system. The detailed account of each character, their behaviors and the particular barriers they faced, immediately drew my interest into the book. In the first chapter, the authors outline the increase in mental health issues and distinguish the two classifications of support services presently available: school-based and school-linked. Further, they define barriers to learning as a temporary or permanent factor, condition, or situation that obstructs or impedes academic progress, resulting in mild to severe effects. A detailed conceptualization depicts two types of barriers to learning, biological-psychological and environmental-circumstantial, as well as two types of outcomes, negative and positive. This conceptualization (represented diagrammatically) depicts how a reduction and prevention of barriers can ameliorate student symptoms and increase student achievement. Additionally, these authors argue that a broad base of professionals, situated uniquely in a school, is necessary to make accurate diagnoses and to recommend appropriate early interventions. The authors also recommend a universal preventative approach to target interventions, based on locally predetermined student needs. In the second and third chapters, the authors identify biological-psychological and environmental-circumstantial barriers to learning. The authors interestingly present the disorders and their descriptions in the order in which they are most likely to be referred, rather than by prevalence. They suggest that biological-psychological barriers to learning, which are the most common, are often the only barriers considered when students have difficulties because school systems are structured to primarily deal with these particular barriers. The author presents useful examples of environmental-circumstantial and biological-psychological symptoms, making the argument that more attention needs to be given to the former symptoms to protect against misdiagnosis and ineffective treatment. Along with describing inadequate interventions, the fourth chapter lists examples of negative outcomes (bullying, school refusal, addictions, early school leaving, suicide, and youth violence) that occur when students receive inadequate interventions to address barriers to learning. In addition to these outcomes, the authors propose that students who are not facing barriers to learning may experience a negative multi-ripple process whereby their academic progress is also compromised because of inadequately addressing other students' barriers. The fifth chapter of the book includes a brief literature review of present and proposed reforms in the education system, which more recently are driven by student achievement (through school leadership and pedagogy) and the mental health system. …

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.047
Scholarly communication0.0210.020
Open science0.0050.022
Research integrity0.0150.021
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation→Same topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development→French-language works237,207→