Changes in peer belonging, school climate, and the emotional health of immigrant, refugee, and non‐immigrant early adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Early adolescents who are new to Canada experience dual challenges of navigating developmental changes and multiple cultures. This study examined how changes in early adolescents' emotional health from ages 9 to 12 differed by immigration background, and to what extent peer belonging and supportive school climate protected or promoted their emotional health. METHODS: This study drew upon linked self-report and administrative data. Across 10 school districts in British Columbia, Canada, N = 4479 non-immigrant, immigrant, and refugee adolescents reported on their peer belonging, school climate, and emotional health (life satisfaction, optimism, self-esteem, sadness, worries) in Grades 4 and 7, using the Middle Years Development Instrument. Immigration background including immigration class (economic, family, refugee) and generation status (first, second) were obtained from linked Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada data. Multi-level modeling assessed the effect of time (grade level), immigration group, and changes in peer belonging and school climate on changes in self-reported emotional health. Analyses were adjusted for gender, English first language, and low family income. RESULTS: Immigrant and refugee adolescents reported worse emotional health in Grade 4 compared to non-immigrants. Non-immigrant and immigrant adolescents reported declines in emotional health from Grades 4 to 7. In contrast, first-generation refugee adolescents reported significant improvements in life satisfaction, and first- and second-generation refugees reported improvements in worries over this period. Perceived improvements in peer belonging and school climate were associated with positive changes in emotional health for all adolescents. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in adolescents' emotional health from Grades 4 to 7 differed between immigrants, refugees, and non-immigrants. Immigrants and refugees who enter adolescence with lower emotional health than their non-immigrant peers may particularly benefit from culturally responsive school and community-based interventions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".