Student Self-Care and Mental Health Well-Being through Creative Art and Art Journaling: Facilitating Self-Care Opportunities through Creative Art for Students in the Helping Professions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Students entering post-secondary education can often become overwhelmed, which can lead to feelings of stress and anxiety. As researchers with an interest in expressive and creative arts for the purpose of well-being we wanted to see if expressive and creative art would provide a positive impact on student learning and well-being. In particular, can the use of expressive arts and art journaling methods effectively engage and guide creative processes, while promoting self-care activities among students in health and public service professions? Moreover, can it potentially reduce anxiety and improve the overall psychological well-being of such students? A pilot project was undertaken with second year students studying in professional human service programs who were also doing a community practicum at an undergraduate university. Volunteers engaged in an eight-week facilitated creative art journaling program. The goal was to determine what impact expressive and creative arts might have on student stress and overall well-being. Data was collected by way of observation, photographs of student art journals, pre-post surveys, and post interviews. Although the pilot was interrupted by Covid-19, enough data was collected to recommend the potential for a positive impact on the well-being of students who engage in creative arts-based journaling practice.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".