Intervention strategies in residential immersive life skills programs for youth with disabilities: a study of active ingredients and program fidelity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To examine intervention strategy use in residential immersive life skills (RILS) programs.Methods: The Service Provider Strategies-Checklist was used to record the strategies used in 100 activity settings across two summers at three RILS program sites. Activity settings were categorized by activity type and session format. Relative occurrence of the strategies was examined using percentages.Results: Socially mediated strategies (listening, engaging youth) and teaching/learning techniques (verbal cues, verbal instruction) were used in over 75% of the settings. Strategy use was highly contextualized, with different strategy patterns observed for different types of activity settings.Conclusion: The findings suggest that RILS programs be characterized by their use of socially mediated strategies and teaching/learning techniques, with socially mediated and non-intrusive strategies appearing to be program hallmarks. Strategy use was aligned with the types of sessions offered, providing evidence of program fidelity and indicating that RILS programs are complex in their formats, activities, and strategy use.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".