School psychology in Canada: A survey of roles and functions, challenges and aspirations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: School psychology in Canada has evolved in recent years from being com-prised mainly of “testers ” to being regarded as an important partner in promoting the psychological and educational needs of children and supporting the mandates of our educational systems. as well, school psychology is now recognized as an area of spe-cialization within professional psychology, and graduate training programs follow a more prescribed curriculum, especially at the doctoral level. This survey is intended to provide a glimpse at the current practices and profession of Canadian school psychol-ogy as viewed by the practitioners. Résumé: au Canada, la psychologie scolaire a récemment évolué où les ‘examinateurs’ sont maintenant considéré comme des partenaires important dans la promotion des besoins psychologiques et éducatifs d’enfants et dans la promotion des mandats fonda-mentaux de nos systèmes éducatifs. De plus, la psychologie scolaire est maintenant reconnue comme une spécialité dans la psychologie professionnelle et les programmes de formation suivent un programme d’enseignement plus prescrit, surtout au niveau du doctorat. Le but de cette enquête est de fournir un aperçu des practiques actuelles et de la psychologie scolaire canadienne du point de vue des praticiens.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".