MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024256755 · doi:10.53841/bpsecp.2018.35.4.19

Consolidation and development

2018· article· en· W3024256755 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Portwood

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational and Child Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsSt. Peter's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOfficerEconomic shortageChristian ministrySocial workPsychologyNational serviceService (business)Consolidation (business)Social WelfareGovernment (linguistics)Medical educationMedicinePolitical scienceManagementLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1950s were a period of consolidation after the upsets of the war years, and the continuing staff shortages up to the end of the 1940s. In 1952 the section of the Annual Report of the Chief School Medical Officer on child guidance in Sheffield was for the first time attributed to the Psychologist in Charge, Mr N. Whilde who had occupied the post since 1940. He notes that the referrals to the service had settled down to a pattern that changed little from one year to the next - boys were referred more than girls, a ratio of around 2:1; schools referred more than 50 per cent of cases and in terms of difficulties; Intellectual and behavioural difficulties accounted for around 80 per cent of referrals. The report also notes that for the first time in many years the service had a psychiatric social worker. The 1953 report notes that for the first time since 1945 the service was fully staffed. However, this was short-lived as two educational psychologists and a social worker resigned at the end of the year. For most of 1954 the service was one psychologist short and had no social workers. There was a vacancy for a senior psychologist, but with no suitable applicants, an assistant psychologist was appointed. At a national level in 1950 the government had commissioned a committee to look at treatment and provision for maladjusted children. Under the chairmanship of Dr Underwood, the committee produced their report that was published in 1955 (Ministry of Education, 1955). The committee consisted of 17 members, mainly medical doctors working in school medical services, a few head teachers and just one psychologist. Dr Alexander, Sheffield’s Chief Education Officer (see Chapter 1) gave evidence to the committee on behalf of the Association of LEAs, and Mr N. Whilde gave evidence on the incidence of maladjustment in the area covered by the Sheffield clinic (Sheffield, West Riding, Rotherham and Doncaster). Sheffield was well represented. Amongst its many recommendations, the Underwood Report recommended that all LEAs should have a child guidance clinic with an educational psychologist, psychiatrist and a social worker, and that each should have a school psychological service. It also wanted child guidance clinics to accept referrals of all individuals up to the age of 18, whether or not they were in full-time education. The report suggested that across England and Wales 280 educational psychologists would be needed to work in child guidance clinics, as well as those posts within school psychological services. They noted the need for an expansion of training in psychology at undergraduate level as well as in the postgraduate training of educational psychologists. The staff shortages in the Sheffield child guidance clinic and school psychological service described above continued throughout the 1950s. An advertised post for a senior psychologist in 1954 failed to attract any suitable applicants, and instead a newly qualified psychologist, Peter Portwood, was appointed as assistant psychologist. Peter remained in the service until 1959 when he moved to Cornwall to become the senior psychologist there, and eventually Principal Educational Psychologist, taking up some important posts in the BPS Division of Education and Child Psychology. His account of the Sheffield Service was written in the 1990s and appears below. Peter died in 2005.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.397 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational and Child PsychologySame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207