Standing on the Edge: How School Leaders Apply Restorative Practices in Response to Cyberbullying and Online Aggression
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper summarizes findings about restorative practices as one aspect of a research study examining vice-principals' responses to harmful cyber events such as cyberbullying and online aggression. It also considers the school's moral and legislated role in responding to these events. It is theorized that these negative online interactions occur as a result of a lack of social regulation, social presence, and empathy. Three theories are considered in connection to cyber conflict and cyberbullying: Tompkins' affect theory; Braithwaite's re-integrative shame theory; and Rettie's social presence theory. The first two are key restorative practices theories while the third considers social presence in online learning environments. Findings indicate that schools are a nexus for online events where the intersection of these theories is evidenced in practice. Based on these findings, recommendations include deliberate consideration for introducing elements of social presence, online regulation, community building, and empathy before and responding to cyber events.
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.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it