Adverse Childhood Experiences: Early Childhood Educators' Awareness and Support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) refer to the prolonged exposure of potentially traumatic events that have lifelong impacts on health and well-being. Early childhood educators (ECEs) can provide supportive environments for children to mitigate the impact of ACEs. This study explored the awareness of ECEs related to ACEs and the assistance they need to create supportive environments for children.Objectives: Provide a Canadian context to ACEs and the early childhood education environment, explore awareness of ECEs related to ACEs and explore the assistance ECEs need to create supportive environments for all children.Methods: Qualitative Description was used to illustrate the narratives of participants’ experiences regarding ACEs. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with early childhood educators (n=9) in Nova Scotia, Canada. Thematic analysis resulted in themes that related to the awareness of ECEs in relation to ACEs and their perceived support to assist children in early childhood settings.Results: ACE awareness was described through parent-to-educator communication, child behaviours, and community location. Barriers to awareness included varying comfort levels of parents and stigma around sharing unfavourable experiences that happen in the home. Participants suggested that creating supportive relationships and environments were important for children experiencing ACEs. Participants discussed additional strategies that could help them feel supported when encountering ACEs, including professional development opportunities, specific ACE training and increased collaboration with other professionals.Conclusion/Discussion: There is limited research using ECEs voices to describe their awareness and perceived support related to ACEs. This research identifies areas of support needed to assist early childhood educators in creating supportive environments for children.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".