Mental health, the sacred, and embodied wisdom: Contemplations on the wholeness and well-being of children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mental health concerns are on the rise in Canada and worldwide. The World Health Organization predicts that by the year 2030 depressive disorders will be the leading cause of the global burden of disease (World Federation for Mental Health, 2012). Eurocentric medical models rooted in modern and post-modern paradigms focus on discourses of health that prioritize physical and mental aspects of being, often disregarding emotional and spiritual aspects altogether. The discourse surrounding mental health in schools shifts by contemplating the pedagogical implications of children’s expressions and understandings of wholeness and well-being from a lens that honours spiritual ways of knowing and being. This study was conducted over an entire school year with a group of ten grade four and five students, honouring the ethic of relationality and ongoing connection essential in carrying out research with children that values their inner wisdom. As an important contribution to the educational literature, five distinct methods (of approaching, making, collecting, analyzing, and expressing data) were made use of (in overlapping ways) while working with the children. The methodology of life writing is drawn upon as a way to share student stories alongside my own and those prevalent in North American society today. The purpose of this research is to offer insight into how we as educators might more comprehensively consider the lives of the students in our midst, valuing them as four-part people—at once physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual beings. The spirit and intent of this study is to provide educators and administrators with theoretical and practical insights on how we might best serve our students as they experience life in its fullness while contributing to a new paradigm in educational research. This research responds to the question, “What are the pedagogical implications of children’s expressions and understandings of well-being and wholeness?” May we not seek to simplify the answers, but continue to expand the questions.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".