Exploring Inclusive Educational Practices Through Professional Inquiry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Porter, Gordon, Deidre Smith (Eds.). (2011). Exploring Inclusive Educational Practices Through Professional Inquiry. The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. 279 pages, ISBN 978-94-6091-556-7 (paperback), 978-94-6091-557-4 (hardback). Overview of the Book Exploring Inclusive Educational Practices provides an excellent framework for the important work of sustained reflection and implementation of inclusive education. Porter and Smith refer to inclusion, defined as all students, including those with disabilities and other special needs, are educated in regular classrooms with their peers in their community schools (p. 18/19), as being a pillar of education. They expertly weave 25 diverse case studies into a five pillared (to extend their metaphor) framework describing inclusive education. Pillar one asks readers to reflect on their commitment to inclusion--do we walk the talk of our values? Pillar two moves into practice--what does inclusion look like at the school level? What professional knowledge and practices are required to ensure that inclusion happens? Pillar three broadens to consider the entire school framework. What are the whole school level plans and practices required to make inclusion work? Pillar four aptly addresses the variety of typical challenges and barriers to making inclusive schools a reality. Pillar five addresses the role of parents, clearly respecting the critical role of parents at the heart of inclusive education. (p. 173) Providing an understanding of multiple perspectives. One of the major strengths of this book is its ability to raise the profile of the multiple perspectives of the variety of players who are required to make inclusive education work. Two vehicles provide these perspectives. First, the book provides case studies from the perspective of students, families, teachers, resource teachers and school principals, covering elementary and high school situations. These case studies provide excellent snap-shots of the lives of real people. The second vehicle to understanding perspectives comes from the various commentaries on each case situation. Commentators include the same roles as case study authors, but with more diversity. They are an international group: members of faculties of education, both professors and administrators; graduate students; leaders of community organizations; professional development consultants; and members of government ministries of education. The commentaries help the reader to develop new insights, understandings and questions. I often found myself wanting more details about the lives of the people involved in the cases, in order to reflect more deeply on strategies to resolve these challenging situations. Alas, books have limited numbers of pages. Raising the Bar The call to Raise the Bar (p.25) of expectations for educators, families and communities is excellent. More links to peer- reviewed research, regarding specific strategies, would help readers who wished to pursue their inevitable question of what do I do in my classroom/home tomorrow? Where can I begin? Some excellent strategies are shared, such as MAPs, but this area of the book could be expanded, perhaps with a reference list. …
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,023 | 0,015 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,032 |
| Communication savante | 0,020 | 0,023 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,015 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».