Evaluation of an Afterschool Mentorship Program for Self-Efficacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Middle school students in Nova Scotia, Canada, are perceived to have low self-efficacy for achieving learning outcomes. While strong self-efficacy beliefs, developed through effective curricula, have been linked to improved academic performance, there is a need for formal evaluation of such curricula. The purpose of this study was to investigate a 10-week afterschool mentorship curriculum that has never been evaluated. The aim of the curriculum is to strengthen self-efficacy beliefs via relationship building exercises, public speaking training, and character education. Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy, which states that treatment influences can alter the strength of self-efficacy, informed the conceptual framework. Evaluation questions explored apparent changes in the self-efficacy of the students from the perspective of seven adult caregivers and the program’s instructor. Interview data were triangulated with quantitative descriptive statistics on the self-efficacy scores of 10 middle school students before and after program participation using the Children’s Hope Scale. Comparison of pre- and posttest scores did not show remarkable differences in self-efficacy beliefs of the students. However, analysis of interview data revealed that children’s self-efficacy beliefs grew, the largest increase being in those described as reserved at the beginning of the program. This study promotes positive social change through an increased understanding that can inform efforts to increase self-efficacy in middle school students.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".