Promoting Classroom Social and Academic Functioning among Children at Risk for ADHD: The MOSAIC Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Social and academic functioning are linked in elementary school, and both are frequently impaired in children with elevated symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study evaluated the Making Socially Accepting Inclusive Classrooms (MOSAIC) program, a classroom intervention to support children's social and academic functioning, especially for children at risk for ADHD. Teachers delivered MOSAIC practices to the whole class and applied some strategies more frequently to target children selected for elevated ADHD symptoms and peer impairment. METHOD: Participants were 34 general education teachers (grades K-5) and 558 children in their classrooms, randomized to MOSAIC or to a typical practice control group for one academic year. In the fall and spring, we assessed (a) peers' sociometric judgments of children, (b) children's self-report of supportive relationships with teachers and peers, and (c) teachers' report of children's social and academic competencies and impairments. RESULTS: Regarding whole class effects, relative to control group children, children in MOSAIC classrooms (target and non-target children) were rated by teachers in spring as having better competencies and lower impairment, after controlling for fall functioning. There were no main effects of MOSAIC on peer sociometrics or child perceptions of supportive relationships. Target status moderated some effects such that, in spring, target children in MOSAIC perceived greater support from their teachers but received poorer sociometrics than did target children in control classrooms. CONCLUSIONS: We discuss the difficulty in changing peers' perceptions of children with ADHD symptoms, even in the presence of improvements in other aspects of social and academic functioning.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.003 |
| 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".