Community Schools: New Perspectives on the Wraparound Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An increasing number of children and youth have mental health disorders. To address this issue, federal and provincial mental health policymakers in Canada have recommended: (a) improving the coordination of services, and (b) increasing the role that schools play in providing supports. One way to operationalize these recommendations is to implement the wraparound approach in the context of a full-service community school. This qualitative, multiple-case study of three community schools in Manitoba, Canada, explores the experiences of stakeholders in community schools as they relate to support for children and youth with mental health disorders and their families. The findings indicate that community schools engage in practices that align with the 10 guiding principles of wraparound. Given the broad-based partnerships in community schools and their focus on collaborative action, they hold promise as sites with the potential to lead the implementation of the wraparound approach.
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 | 0.019 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".