MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362475928 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp16322

School Safety

2023· article· en· W4362475928 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Xi Zhu, Emily Reed

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicVaried Academic Research Topics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPunitive damagesFeelingPsychologyMental healthMedical educationApplied psychologyPedagogySocial psychologyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of our collaborative research is to explore effective strategies to ensure student safety in elementary schools. Student safety includes both physical safety, prevention of physical violence, abuse, or bullying (DPHCS, n.d.); and psychological safety, establishing well-being, belonging in classrooms and support for emotional and mental health. Findings suggest misunderstandings, microaggressions, racism, and physical violence directly undermine feelings of belonging (Cohen, 2021), with a wide range of school violence leaving students vulnerable to a negative learning environment and an adverse impact on growth (NASP, 2023). Elementary teachers should collaborate with principals, school boards, and parents in fostering positive behavioural learning and the continuous support of Bill 13 of the Accepting Schools Act (DPCDSB, 2012). Further research on this topic could enact new safety regulations within schools, with an emphasis on psychological safety and better implementation of physical safety protocols. Our recommendations will support elementary educators as they recognize the ineffectiveness of punitive negative reinforcement, and the importance of necessary precautions and getting involved in protecting the school community.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1620.051

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicVaried Academic Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207