The impact of social contexts in schools : adolescents who are new to Canada and their sense of belonging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the ways in which school social context impacts sense of school belonging for adolescents who are new to Canada, in relation to those who are not new. More specifically, do perceptions of similarity to others at school, school diversity, and five types of social support predict higher levels of school belonging for participants. 733 adolescents (282 males and 451 females) from grades 5 to 12 were recruited from schools in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. Hierarchical Multiple Regression analyses were used and it was found that Perceived Similarity, Adult Support for School Help, Adult Support for Personal Help, and Peer Support for ‘Hanging Out’ contributed to the prediction of School Belonging for participants. Furthermore, moderator analysis indicated that newer generation Canadians had a stronger relationship between Adult Support for School Help and School Belonging. Similarly, newer generation Canadians showed a stronger relationship between Peer Support for Personal Help and School Belonging. The implications for adolescents who are newer to Canada and less new to Canada are discussed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".