MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200523388 · doi:10.3390/educsci11120796

Trauma-Informed School Strategies for SEL and ACE Concerns during COVID-19

2021· article· en· W4200523388 on OpenAlexaff
Jesse Scott, Lindsey Jaber, Christina M. Rinaldi

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisadvantagedCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicPerspective (graphical)Psychology2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The precarious circumstances associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have raised important questions concerning the potential impact on child and adolescent development. For instance, how might this disruption influence social and emotional learning (SEL) and affect adverse childhood experiences (ACEs)? Moreover, what protective practices may be put in place to mitigate risks? The purpose of this critical review is to engage with these questions. Relevant research findings published before and during pandemic contexts are presented. Connections between SEL, ACEs and past social disruptions are substantiated in the literature. Additionally, preliminary evidence has elucidated variables associated with ACEs and SEL concerns during the pandemic. For instance, research suggests that students from socially disadvantaged positions may be disproportionately impacted by these issues. Actionable trauma-informed recommendations for educators are discussed, including creating safe school environments and adopting a strength-based perspective.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.342 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducation SciencesSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207