MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525368163 · doi:10.5539/ies.v9n10p16

An Application Model of Reality Therapy to Develop Effective Achievement Goals in Tier Three Intervention

2016· article· en· W2525368163 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sunawan Sunawan, Junmei Xiong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Perspective (graphical)Class (philosophy)Student achievementPsychologyReality therapyAcademic achievementGoal orientationMathematics educationMedical educationComputer sciencePsychotherapistMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes an application of reality therapy to developing effective achievement goals for students in tier three of a tiered response to intervention approach. The roles of teachers and school counselors, to improve effective achievement goals, are briefly discussed as a frame for applying reality therapy. The application model includes procedures for assessing students’ ineffective achievement goals, interpretation of achievement goals from a reality therapy perspective, counseling steps, and purposes of counseling. Counseling steps are based on the WDEP system, which consists of analysis of wants and needs, direction and doing, self-evaluation and planning. The purposes of reality therapy can be applied as the basis for developing and implementing students’ new effective achievement goals.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207