Parent Educational Process in Promoting Preschoolers’ Emotional Well-Being Using Contemplative Education and Positive Psychology Coaching Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The parent educational process was developed by implementing Participatory Action Research (PAR), using Contemplative Education and Positive Psychology Coaching approaches. Herein, our aim is to promote emotional well-being for preschoolers aged 3-6 years. Participants included 9 parents and 9 preschoolers who were involved in the process for seven months. Research instruments included parental self-assessment, semi-structured interview questions, short notes, and daily field notes. Data analysis encompassed both quantitative and qualitative analyses. Quantitative data were analyzed, using sums and averages, which were presented in a descriptive diagram. Qualitative data underwent content analysis. Findings revealed that the developed parent educational process consisted of five steps: 1) building a community of trust, 2) inner contemplation, 3) designing pathways, 4) enhancing understanding, and 5) disseminating participatory experiences. Seven driven strategies were carried out, comprising companionship, deep listening, network empowerment, collaborative decision-making, effective communication, powerful questioning, and continuum of practicing in daily life. The developed process demonstrated a structured yet adaptable design. It is noted that the nine parents who participated in the process became more competent in promoting emotional well-being for preschoolers. After implementing the process, preschoolers exhibited an increased level of emotional well-being.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".