MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413735930 · doi:10.33137/jrmh.v8i2.45121

Learning experience and relationships among learners in online Recovery College courses: an exploratory qualitative study

2025· article· en· W4413735930 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anick Sauvageau, Julie Bellemare, Catherine Briand

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Recovery in Mental Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersStichting tot Steun Vereniging tot Christelijke Verzorging van Geestes- en Zenuwzieken
KeywordsExploratory researchPsychologyQualitative researchMathematics educationOnline learningPedagogyMultimediaComputer scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Recovery Colleges (RC) are community-based learning centers. They offer courses in mental health, well-being and recovery. RC courses are co-constructed and co-facilitated by two trainers with complementary knowledge. Learners come from diverse backgrounds ensuring a variety of expertise and experiences. Studies have demonstrated the benefits of RC courses for learners. The mechanisms of action specific to RC explains the benefits. Studies about the mechanisms of action of RC show the importance of the social environment of RC. The Centre d'apprentissage Santé et Rétablissement (CASR) is a Canadian French-language RC offering free online courses to the public. Objectives: The study aims to answer two research question: 1- How do learners of CASR’s online courses describe their learning experience? 2- How do learners of CASR’s online courses describe the relationships they experienced? Methods: An exploratory qualitative study consisting of ten individual interviews followed by a thematic analysis was conducted. Results: Participants describe their learning experiences in terms of the characteristics of the CASR course space: inclusive and benevolent learning space; connected, supportive, and egalitarian space for interaction; collaborative and co-constructed knowledge space. Participants describe the relationships in terms of: equality; respect and non-judgment; recognition and belonging; collaboration and mutual support. Conclusion: The results confirm the existence of mechanisms of action in CASR courses like those identified in previous studies. The learning context of the CASR prompts some participants to prioritize their personal roles over their professional roles during courses. By exposing their vulnerability, they show humility and encounter equal relationships.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Recovery in Mental HealthSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207