A Quasi-Experimental Study on Social Emotional Learning and Primary Prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to determine the efficacy of the Top 20 social emotional learning (SEL) program and how their SEL curriculum may lead to an increase in SEL. The secondary goal of this study was to explore how the social emotional competencies of self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, personal responsibility, decision-making, optimistic thinking, and goal-directed behavior may play a significant role in a child and adolescent’s social emotional development. A total of 359 middle school students participated in the study. The experimental group consisted of 170 students and the control group consisted of 189 students. Two middle school teachers at the school helped embed and teach the Top 20 SEL curriculum and monthly SEL lessons to all students in the experimental group. The teachers completed the Devereux Student Strengths Assessment (DESSA) pre-test one month into the study and the DESSA post-test five months later. The descriptive analysis revealed an increase in all eight social emotional competencies for the experimental group with a total SEL difference score of M = 8.23. The Top 20 SEL program has demonstrated how experience and practice in SEL skills are more likely to lead to an increase in SEL.
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 | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".