Evaluation of a Wellness Programme for Preservice Teachers in Hong Kong: Promoting Educational Excellence Through Resilience to Stress ( <scp>PEERS</scp> )
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a wellness programme for preservice teachers, Promoting Educational Excellence through Resilience to Stress (PEERS) . The intervention group participants, who took part in the 4‐week PEERS programme, and the comparison group participants were recruited online. A battery of self‐report scales assessed various psychological constructs, including coping self‐efficacy, resilience, mental health, well‐being, mindfulness and self‐compassion. Data were collected at three time points: before the intervention (T1), immediately after programme completion (T2) and 4 weeks after programme completion (T3). Results suggested that the intervention group participants reported significant improvements in coping self‐efficacy, resilience and the nonjudging facet of mindfulness. High programme satisfaction was also reported, with 96% of the participants rating the overall programme as good or excellent. Therefore, the results demonstrate the effectiveness and positive impact of the PEERS programme on the resilience and coping efficacy of preservice teachers in Hong Kong.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".