Discovering a relationship: adolescents' insights into the counselling relationship in a secondary school setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to explore, with five grade twelve students, their understandings of the counselling relationships they shared with their counsellors in a single northern B.C. secondary school setting. The investigation was guided by four questions: (1) What conditions make it possible for the students to talk to a school counsellor? (2) What conditions give students the confidence to share private and confidential information with their counsellor? (3) What are the critical incidents during their counselling which affected the development of the counselling relationship? (4) What were the characteristic elements that constituted the counselling relationship between a school counsellor and a student client? Participants were identified by their school counsellors based on the following criteria: (1) the students were grade twelve students, (2) they were familiar with the counselling programme in their school, (3) they had developed a personal counselling relationship with the students, ( 4) the students could articulate their understandings of those relationships, and ( A series of open ended, in-depth interviews were conducted with the students. Grounded Theory method was used to analyse the data that was transcribed from these interviews. A conceptual model of the counselling relationship was developed consisting of five stages: the Motivating Stage, the Initiating Stage, the Comfort Stage, the Working Alliance Stage, and the Change Stage. Each stage was further divided into Key Categories and Subsidiary Categories that provided insights into conditions that fostered the development of the counselling relationship in the secondary school setting. The search for comfort in the counselling relationship was a constant theme throughout all stages and was identified as the core concept of the model. Several implications for practice were identified and included: ( 1) the centrality of the personal counselling relationship to the school counsellor's role, (2) the conflict between supervisory roles and the development of a personal counselling relationship, (3) the advantages of a multifaceted role for school counsellors, (4) the role of counselling as an arena of comfort, (5) the importance of giving students a role in the design of counselling services, (6) the importance of a professional friendship in the counselling relationship, and (7) the importance of clearly articulated professional identities for school counsellors.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".