Use of Educational Technology in Inclusive Primary Education: Protocol for a Systematic Review
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.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Educational technology (EdTech) has been instrumental in the last few decades in promoting inclusive education by overcoming various learning barriers and offering tools and opportunities to all students, including those with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). However, there is limited understanding of current classroom practices and policies and of the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on EdTech use in the inclusive classroom. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to outline the current knowledge on the use of EdTech to support the learning of students with SEND in inclusive primary schools in high-income countries. METHODS: We followed the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) and the Generalized Systematic Review Registration Form in reporting the details of this protocol. The inclusion criteria for the systematic review require that studies focus on students with SEND who are attending the primary stage of school in high-income countries. The studies can be qualitative or quantitative and should explore the design and use of EdTech with these students. Eligible studies must be published between 2016 and 2024, be peer-reviewed, and be available in English. We systematically searched the ACM, Directory of Open Access Journals, British Educational Index, ERIC, Google Scholar (first 100 records), IEEE, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The titles and abstracts of all records will be screened for relevance according to the inclusion criteria. Following this, the full text of the articles will be screened. To ensure the reliability of the screening process, an independent reviewer will screen a percentage of the records for the first screening round. The data extraction process for this systematic review will start with a pilot stage to validate and eventually update the list of entities to be extracted. Following the pilot stage, the final data extraction will be undertaken. An independent reviewer will extract data from a subsample of the records to ensure the reliability of the data extraction process. RESULTS: The database search was conducted in July 2024. The database search identified a total of 547 records. It is anticipated that the study findings will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal by the end of January 2025. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide up-to-date evidence of the use of EdTech in inclusive primary school settings in high-income countries and will describe the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use of EdTech with students with SEND. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/65045.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
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 découle