Rethinking the Role of Educational Assistants to Better Support Inclusive Education in Ontario Secondary Schools
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of this project was to review how educational assistants support students with significant support needs (SSN), such as, developmental disabilities, autism, and multiple disabilities in inclusive secondary school classrooms, and to create learning guides for administrators to use when providing professional development to educational assistants. The learning guides focus on collaboration and research-based practices that close student learning gaps, improve student achievement, and foster inclusive classrooms. Research has shown the role of the school principal to be pivotal for fostering new meaning, promoting inclusive school cultures and instructional programs as well as building relationships between schools and communities (Riehl, 2000). Educational assistants support the emotional, social, and academic success of all students, but particularly for those with special education needs. Administration and educational assistants both play important roles in student success and in creating inclusive classrooms; therefore, it is essential that they both learn alongside each other with a shared goal of student success. This project is in response to my work within the Upper Canada District School Board as a classroom teacher, special education teacher, secondary learning resource coach, student engagement teacher, vice principal, and principal. Throughout my career I have been dedicated to creating a positive, caring, and inclusive learning environment where all students are encouraged, supported, and given the opportunity to reach their full potential. I have had the privilege of working with many highly effective educational assistants who shared my vision, and working together, along with the help of other dedicated staff, parents, and families, many of my students with significant support needs went on to earn their Ontario Secondary School Diploma. When I moved to administration nine years ago, I made listening to and honouring educational assistants’ voices and their professional development a priority. I have made it a practice to have weekly team meetings with educational assistants with professional development as the focus. I discovered that this practice is not widely adopted throughout our school district, nor are there resources to support this practice. This resource guide was designed, edited, and revised based on informal feedback from many stakeholders, including administrators, classroom teachers, special education teachers, student success teachers, guidance teachers, and educational assistants. This project may be valuable to administrators who are interested in providing professional development to their school’s educational assistants and are looking for resources to support them. These learning guides are based on five topics, that include current research and how to put learning into action compiled into easily accessible documents with links to resources.
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 | 0,022 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,016 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,012 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| 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 ».