The Psychology of Psychologists: An Exploration of the Factors that Influence School Psychologists' Practices and Perspectives in the Assessment of Children Referred with Behvioural Difficulties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children all around the world demonstrate behaviour problems. These may consist of a wide array of disruptions ranging from mildly annoying and relatively minor problems to more significant and marked behaviours. Among the forty-three countries where school psychology services exist, school psychologists are often called upon to assess children who are demonstrating behaviour difficulties and other mental health issues. Yet few studies exist which explore school psychologists’ practices and perspectives in the assessment of children referred due to behaviour difficulties. This thesis will contribute to the existing body of knowledge by exploring the: 1. Theoretical Factors, School Psychologist Factors and 3. Assessment Factors that influence Ontario school psychologists’ practices and/or perspectives in their assessments of children referred with behavioural difficulties. Forty-four school psychologists from the province of Ontario, Canada, participated in a mixed-methods study using self-administered postal questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. The results of this study highlight that Ontario school psychologists aim to provide psychological assessments that allow them to identify difficulties across the continuum of behaviour from mild to severe. Significant findings include relationships between the areas of: training, registration, years of professional experience, methods of assessment, diagnosis, interventions, as well as theoretical perspectives of behaviour. As school psychology continues to grow internationally, it is essential that school psychologists are at the forefront of conducting research that encourages self-reflection, enhances their knowledge and skills, and advances the profession.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".