The STRONG Resiliency Program for Newcomer Youth: A Mixed-Methods Exploration of Youth Experiences and Impacts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many refugee and immigrant youth face significant adversity, pre- and post-migration, as well as during their migratory journey. Although these youth demonstrate considerable resilience, there is also an opportunity to bolster coping skills and adjustment with group-based interventions in schools. We utilized a mixed-methods approach to describe the impacts of one such program, as experienced by youth (n=19). The program is a ten-session strengths-based resilience intervention that promotes relaxation skills, healthy coping, communication, and problem-solving. There is also one individual session focused on helping each participant share their journey narrative. Youth from six intervention groups participated in this study through completing pre- and post-intervention surveys and focus groups. Our qualitative results identified a high level of acceptability among youth. Perceived benefits included improved coping and relaxation strategies, increased confidence and trust, increased peer connectedness and belongingness, benefits of sharing and exchanging stories with peers, and increased knowledge in the Canadian context. Youths’ scores on resilience and use of STRONG skills increased significantly from pre- to post-intervention, but there was no change in school connectedness scores. We discuss the convergence between qualitative and quantitative findings and highlight some of the areas that were only evident in focus groups. Youth made minor suggestions for program improvement. Based on this small pilot, a resilience intervention resonated with newcomer youth and helped them foster their strengths.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".