MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2372633057 · doi:10.1177/0143034315614689

Bolstering resilience through teacher-student interaction: Lessons for school psychologists

2015· article· en· W2372633057 on OpenAlexaffabout
Linda Liebenberg, Linda Theron, Jackie Sanders, Robyn Munford, Angelique van Rensburg, Sebastiaan Rothmann, Michael Ungar

Bibliographic record

VenueSchool Psychology International · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChampionPsychosocialPsychological resiliencePsychologyPositive Youth DevelopmentPedagogySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schools are often the only formal service provider for young people living in socio-economically marginalized communities, uniquely positioning school staff to support positive psychosocial outcomes of youth living in adverse contexts. Using data from 2,387 school-going young people [Canada ( N = 1,068), New Zealand ( N = 591), and South Africa ( N = 728)] living in marginalized communities and who participated in the Pathways to Resilience study, this article reviews how student experiences of school staff and school contexts moderated contextual risks and facilitated resilience processes. Findings of these analyses affirm that school staff play an important role in moderating the relationship between resilience resources and community/family risk in both global North and global South contexts. Findings hold important implications for school psychologists, including the need to champion the ways in which teachers can scaffold resilience resources for young people through the quality of the relationships they build with students.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0030.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 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

Citations78
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchool Psychology InternationalSame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207