MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010428673 · doi:10.5539/jel.v9n2p148

Effect of Personal and Social Responsibility-Based Social-Emotional Learning Program on Emotional Intelligence

2020· article· en· W3010428673 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Neslihan Arikan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEducation Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyEmotional intelligenceCurriculumDescriptive statisticsVocational educationTest (biology)Social intelligenceControl (management)Mathematics educationSocial responsibilitySocial emotional learningScale (ratio)Social psychologyPedagogyDevelopmental psychologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Programs for social-emotional learning implemented in schools are important in terms of improving students’ emotional and social skills. In the study, a 16-week program was prepared using the Social-Emotional Learning (SEL) model based on the Personal and Social Responsibility Model (TPSR). The program was implemented in three different school types and the effect of the TPSR-SEL program on the emotional intelligence levels of the students was examined according to the school types. The research group was composed of 162 students in total who study at Anatolian High School (n=55), Vocational Technical Anatolian High School (n=51) and Sports High School (n=56) in Afyon province. In research, pattern with experimental pre-test final-test control group was used. Experiment and control groups were formed in all three-school types. The 16-week TPSR-SEL program was applied to the students in the experimental groups and the current curriculum was applied to the students in the control groups. The Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale (SEI-S) was used as a data tool. Standard deviation—mean and Two-Way Covariance Analysis (Two-Way ANCOVA) was used for data analysis. As a result of the descriptive statistics, it was determined that there were significant differences between the SEI-S total scores of the experiment and control groups, that there was a significant increase in the final-test total scores of the students in experiment group in all three types of schools, and that the total scores of the control group students remained at the same level. In addition, it was found that the joint effects of participation in the TPSR-SEL program and school type on emotional intelligence scores were significant.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicEducation Practices and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207