Parent education in family-centered practice with families of children with special needs : a partnership towards family empowerment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parent education in the area of family-centered practice with families of children with special needs was the focus of my practicum.Identified as a pilot project under the Family strengths in chitdhood Disability project, a project assessing the implementation of family-centered practice in Manitoba, this practicum provided me with an opportunity to develop advanced skitls in utilizing a family- centered approach to practice.An orientation guide for parents was developed, a curiculum and training manual were designed, and two parent education groups were co-facilitated with a parent of an adult child with special needs.Seven families currently involved in the FSCD project participated in the pa"rent education groups; four families attended the full day session and two families attended the two evening sessions.Parents rated the group experience positively and indicated that the intervention met their need for information, increased their awareness and knowledge, and significantly reduced confusion and uncertainty.Added findings revealed that the education groups reduced parents' fear and isolation and provided opportunities for parents to interact with other parents.There is compelling evidence to suggest that parent education, in the context of this practicum, is a key intervention that promotes interagency collaboration, cornmunity partnerships, and, most importantly, parental empowerment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".