Canadian school psychologists' understanding of bullying intervention based on their experiences in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
School bullying (referred to in this thesis as bullying) was a phenomenon with serious implications regarding short-term and long-term effects on the individuals involved (Craig & Pepler, 1999). While interventions of bullying early in an individual’s life might help alleviate the effects of bullying (Carter & Stewin, 1999), there were concerns that current intervention efforts were not optimal (Furlong et al., 2002; Pepler & Craig, 2011; PrevNet, 2007). Addressing the issue of bullying required a broader effort beyond any school in silo can accomplish (Fagan et al., 2009; Kania et al. 2011). A broader coordinated strategy was needed from schools, communities, and other stakeholders (Fagan et al. 2009; Kania et al. 2011). The present study aimed to explore school psychologists’ understanding of bullying intervention based on their experiences in Alberta, a province that has legislation and public concern over bullying (Alberta Education, 2014; Reid, 2010). To explore the school psychologists’ experience of bullying interventions a cross-case analysis approach was utilized. Eight school psychologists were interviewed. who are ideal persons for bullying intervention due to their training, and broad school wide perspective and target caseload in their school positions (Espelage et al., 2013; GSA Network, 2011; Morrison & Furlong, 1994; Murphy, 2012; National Association of School Psychologists, 2014). Interview data were coded using the constant comparative method (Hurworth & Mathison, 2011). The study showed bullying intervention was a complex experience with no simple pathway to remedying the phenomenon. Criteria to consider with bullying intervention included how bullying manifests in terms of the victim, the bully and the bullying behavior, the personnel and characteristics of the personnel involved, the focus of the bullying intervention, resources used, the role of the school psychologist, the referral route of the incident, the needs and priorities of the school, and the culture of bullying. Implications of this complexity included an emphasis on the importance of working cohesively between the multiple factors involved in bullying, and consideration of the multiple factors involved in bullying. Furthermore, the research emphasized the complexity of bullying going beyond a simple relationship between a bully and a victim.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.010 | 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".