Social-Emotional Learning and Evaluation in After-School Care: A Working Model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social-emotional competence in children is an important area in which to develop and improve effective programs and evaluation. Research shows a positive association between social-emotional learning (SEL) and improvements in students’ conduct, social behavior, and school engagement as well as decreases in high-risk behaviors such as taking drugs, smoking and aggression. Extensive research points to the positive benefits of successful SEL curriculum in schools, but less research exists on SEL implementation in after-school care settings. Since social-emotional competence is correlated with higher positive effects and a decrease of negative effects in the social, behavioral, and academic outcomes of children exposed to these programs, more research is needed on the most effective format and environment for implementation. The purpose of this article is to review this research, and report the results of an evaluation comparing pre- and post-program survey data from children (n = 125; age range=4-11 years) attending an after-school program that has incorporated an SEL curriculum. Results showed significant increases in two SEL competencies: empathy and self-soothing. The advantages to providing both SEL instruction and evaluation in after-school care settings in addition to schools is also explored.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it