MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1584332600

Investigating the Attitudes of Elementary School Teachers, School Psychologists and Guidance Research Center Personnel on the Process of Preparing the Individualized Educational Program and Challenges Faced during the Related Process.

2009· article· en· W1584332600 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueEducational Sciences Theory & Practice · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueTeacher Professional Development and Motivation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPsychologyScale (ratio)Medical educationProcess (computing)Service (business)MedicineComputer science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Th is study aims to analyze attitudes of elementary school teachers, school psychologists and guidance research center personnel regarding developing an individualized educational program (IEP) process as well as challenges faced during related process, according to several variables. Th e study included 201 participants who were working in several districts of Ankara province. Th e Attitudes towards Development Process Scale and Challenges during Development Process Scale were used in this study. Th e scales were developed and validity and reliability of them have been investigated by researchers. Results have shown that, with exception of age variable, attitudes with respect to development process and challenges faced varied according to post as an elementary school teacher, school psychologist or guidance research center personnel as well as to variables such as institution participants worked in, previous involvement in in-service training and previous participation in development. While terms of in-service training sessions did not lead to a signifi cant difference in attitudes, it proved to be a variable causing signifi cant diff erences in terms of challenges faced. Findings regarding attitude diff erences across variables revealed that gender [t(201) = .29; p > .07] and participation in in-service training programs [t(78) = 1.83; p > .07] did not lead to a signifi cant diff erence on attitudes whereas age [F(2-198) =7.67; p .09], whereas age [F(2-198) =3.78; p Key Words Individualized Educational Program (IEP), Team, Developing Process, Attitudes towards IEP, Guidance and Research Centers. Liability to develop individualized educational programs (IEP) to meet educational requirements of children with special needs have been introduced in several legislations. Th is liability is provided under USA Education for All Handicapped Children Act dated 1975, Canada School Act dated 1995 and UK Education Act dated 1996 (Fiscus, & Mandell, 1997; T.C. Basbakanlik Ozurluler idaresi Baskanligi, 2005). Taking into consideration studies regarding development and implementation in Turkey, it is observed that such studies are rather new and that development and implementation for individuals with special needs were introduced through Decree Law no 573 enacted in 1997. Th rough this Decree Law, right of education was provided to all individuals with special needs so that they could benefi t from educational facilities (MillI Egitim Bakanligi [MEB], 1997; Sucuoglu, & Kargin, 2006). In aftermath of Decree Law dated 1997, Regulation on Special Education Services dated 2000 defi ned in its article no 62. According to this defi nition, is the special curricula developed for an individual in need of special education, which is approved by his/her parents; being developed in line with needs of individual as well as teacher and parents, including also supportive education services in accordance with designed purposes. Article 63 of abovementioned regulation provides for setting up of IEP Development Teams. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,017
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Études des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,496
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0170,015
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,003
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,105
Tête enseignante GPT0,471
Écart entre enseignants0,366 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle