Conversations with caregivers: Indigenous perspectives on engagement with school psychologists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impacts of residential schools on the wellbeing of Indigenous peoples and communities have generated mistrust with Western colonial education and mental health systems. This legacy of harm creates barriers to engagement for Indigenous caregivers, which may impact children’s positive social and academic outcomes. There is a gap in opportunities for positive Indigenous caregiver engagement with school psychologists as well as inadequate knowledge of the influences on this engagement. The present study aimed to address this by building knowledge on Indigenous caregivers’ experiences engaging with school psychologists through a qualitative study. Based in Manitoba, Canada, eight self-identifying Indigenous caregivers of children with past and/or current involvement with school psychologists shared their experiences with engagement to build insights on the perceived barriers and facilitators to involvement. Qualitative data from interviews was thematically analyzed and identified emergent themes of: relationships with school psychologists, caregiver perceptions of engagement, support accessibility, and systemic changes and connection to culture. The current research privileges Indigenous caregiver perspectives and experiences with school psychologists to help inform psychological service delivery in schools. Future research in this area should aim to include a broader range of Indigenous voices and viewpoints, as well as follow up with recommendations for positive engagement.
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 | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".