MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238687170 · doi:10.24124/2009/bpgub1402

Effective behavior support (EBS): "where we have been, where we are going"

2009· dissertation· en· W4238687170 on OpenAlexaff
Brenda Lee Anderson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Action planPlan (archaeology)Order (exchange)PsychologyAction researchMathematics educationPedagogyMedical educationMedicineManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective behavior support (EBS) is a school-wide program that helps the school put strategies in place to teach children positive behavior. Students and staff embark on a journey together to make their school a rich environment for student learning. Research has shown that if students behave positively in their school, their academic performance can change. Over the past five years, our school has embarked on the journey to engage students in positive behavior. This action research project explored my school's current practices and allowed me to engage in critical dialogue with my colleagues to gain new insight and explore new paths to improve my practice for implementing the practices of EBS. As a coach of EBS, I felt it was time to look deeper into what we have done, what we are doing, and where we could go from here. There is a need to amalgamate our information, scrutinize our data, and put together an action plan proposal in order to ensure that our school stays on the positive behavior track on which it has been. --P. i.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.005

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207