MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806535699 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs92201818210

STRUGGLE FOR INTEGRITY IN RESIDENTIAL CHILDREN’S HOMES: PROFESSIONAL SELF-ESTEEM AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT — PRACTICAL EXPERIENCES FROM HUNGARY

2018· article· en· W2806535699 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zsolt Balázs Major

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPremisePerspective (graphical)PsychologyIdentity (music)Process (computing)Public relationsSociologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents an organizational development process — a therapeutic residential care model known as “Armchair” — that is based on qualitative experiences gained by the author in 10 years of practice, and that draws upon theories from child and youth care (CYC) and organizational psychology. The ideas described here have been implemented in several children’s homes in Hungary. Based on the premise that CYC is an autonomous applied science, the paper describes briefly the theoretical principles created from everyday practice in Hungary. It examines similarities between this model and the Cornell CARE model from the United States in relation to such aspects as the basic needs of children in residential care and the long-term orientation to building practice methods within agencies. A practical approach with a system-oriented perspective developed in Hungary for implementing the principles is presented. This includes a Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle model-quality assurance system designed to meet the needs of children, and furnishes an example of how information technology software can support the daily job of employees in terms of administrative and supportive activities. The article discusses weaknesses, threats, or challenges that can occur during implementation and threaten the program’s aims of helping both children and staff. This analysis uncovers the underlying role and importance of positive identity and self-esteem among staff, with a strong focus on personal and professional integrity. In conclusion, findings are presented that indicate some possible solutions for the problems discussed, comparing these qualitative results to previous quantitative evidence found in research studies measuring the effectiveness of the CARE model, and drawing some commonalities from the two approaches.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207