The co-development of a new inclusive pedagogical planner
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Typically, across Canada, curriculum and special education are separate and distinct branches within provincial departments of education. The development of two branches within one provincial department has created a challenge for classroom teachers expected to integrate provincial curricular and special education mandates. Some teachers have reported they grapple with “curriculum overload” (National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, 2010) while others feel “ill-equipped” to sustain an inclusive pedagogical practice (Black-Hawkins, 2010; Florian, 2008). The purpose of this qualitative collaborative action research study was to co-develop, with teachers, a new Inclusive Pedagogical Planner (IPP). A new IPP intended to support and guide teachers as they integrate provincial mandates regarding curriculum and special education. The central research questions for the study were (1) Can a new IPP, that is useful, practical, and supports and guides an inclusive planning process, be co-developed with classroom teachers, and (2) Can curriculum and inclusion be integrated into a new IPP that facilitates the development or advancement of an inclusive pedagogical practice? Recruited for the study as active collaborators were four middle-years teachers. The active collaborators engaged in every aspect of the study as they contributed to the design, implementation, and critical analysis of the new IPP. The findings initially revealed that this group of teachers grappled with curriculum overload and some felt ill-equipped as they developed or tried to sustain an inclusive pedagogical practice. However, as a result of being a collaborative member of this study and participating in the co-development of the new IPP they identified a positive change in their inclusive pedagogical practice. They also indicated that they benefited from having an opportunity to dialogue with their colleagues and reflect on their own theories and ideas about inclusion and their pedagogical practices regarding the curriculum. Opportunities for further development of the IPP and future research include (a) using new IPP as a teaching tool with undergraduate students, (b) implementation of the IPP with a larger number of participants spanning a broader range of grade-levels and years of teaching experience, and (c) the supporting binder could be enhanced with the addition of new 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 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, 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 ».