Implementing Partnering for Change in Québec: Occupational Therapy Activities and Stakeholders’ Perceptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND.: The occupational therapy school-based Partnering for Change (P4C) model has mostly been documented in Ontario. PURPOSE.: This implementation study describes the implementation of P4C in two Québec elementary schools (P4C-Q), as well as therapy practices, their impacts, factors perceived to influence implementation, and recommendations. METHOD.: A sequential mixed-methods design was applied. Therapists (n=2) completed daily journals, describing activities by P4C-Q level. Therapists and other school-stakeholders (n=11) participated in semi-structured interviews, analyzed through a content analysis framework. FINDINGS.: Daily journals illustrated that the majority of therapy time was spent on activities targeting the entire classroom, and on collaboration with educators. Interviews illustrated how coaching was used across different practices and the impact of these practices for schools (e.g., capacity-building) and children (e.g., increased functioning), and highlighted how relationship-building is key to facilitating the implementation of this model. IMPLICATIONS.: Lessons learned may be helpful for others implementing P4C in their own contexts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".