A collaboration of student nurse coaches and students with mental illnesses in a college preparation project.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: With refined diagnostic tools, earlier recognition, new pharmacological and other treatment modalities, individuals living with mental illnesses are able to experience considerable recovery. Some individuals require support and guidance to build confidence and to manage in everyday situations. Previous to their illness, many had been functioning and able to meet their needs in most aspects of their lives, including academics, but, following illness, lacked confidence or skill to continue their education. This pilot program was designed to socialize students with a mental illness to life at college. METHODS: To develop the pilot concept, college departments including nursing faculty and community mental health personnel collaborated together. Potential students attended informational sessions where those interested, applied for entry into the pilot. Each student was paired with a coach, a third year nursing student, with whom they established and evaluated goals geared towards registering independently in a college course the following semester. RESULTS: Evaluation of the program was measured in terms of attendance, registration in a college course for the following semester or job readiness, and focus group evaluation sessions. By the end of the semester, 12 of the 13 students completed the program. CONCLUSIONS: With support and guidance of their coaches, students gained confidence, developed a social support network and learned skills needed to be able to navigate the college system. This type of college preparation program is effective in assisting students with mental illness to access college courses and it is recommended that there be further similar programs offered as an orientation at the college level for students with mental illness in preparation for their registration and attendance at college. To minimize cost factors and gain administrative support, practitioners wishing to replicate this study would do well to consider sources of funding, as well as resource personal or volunteers in order to keep costs to a minimum.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".