MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7064277677

Bringing an Understanding of Elementary School Teachers’ Rationale for their Classroom Design to OT Practice

2024· article· en· W7064277677 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Medicine Forum · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePhysics and Astronomy
ThématiqueMagnetic confinement fusion research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCredibilityCoding (social sciences)AuditPerceptionReflexivityLearning environmentQualitative researchSocial constructivismPsychological intervention
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction Physical, sensory, and social aspects of the classroom environment directly influence students’ behavior, learning and academic achievement. Both teachers and occupational therapy practitioners (OTPs) approach the design, adaptation, and use of the classroom from their respective knowledge base (Wintle, et al, 2022). Grandisson et al. (2020) noted that OTPs can often know very little about the school personnel, their pedagogy, the school culture, or the classroom routines. This can lead to a disconnect between OTPs recommendations for classroom environment modifications and teachers’ design and use of the same space. Objectives The purpose of this study was to explore the factors that influence elementary-school teachers design and use of their classroom environment and map these factors to an occupational therapy framework. It aimed to advance OTPs awareness of how teachers use the classroom environment, and to explain the facilitators and barriers that impact the classroom environment design from the teachers’ point of view. Methods A qualitative phenomenological study was conducted using virtual semi-structured interviews; which were transcribed. Two coders independently reviewed the transcripts and coded each of them twice; once using the school-based Person-Environment-Occupation model (Hasselbusch, & Dancza, 2012) as a coding matrix and once using the School Climate Model (Gislason, 2018) as a coding matrix. Discrepancies between the coders were discussed until 100% agreement was achieved to ensure credibility and dependability. After the 4th transcript independent intercoder reliability of 80% was reached. An audit trail and reflexivity journal was kept to support transparency, A deductive content analysis approach was completed. Results Five elementary school teachers from the US (n=2), Canada (n=2), and England (n=1) participated in the study. All but one identified as white, they ranged in ages from 29-55 years, and had between 2 and 26 years experience. The analysis reveal five themes: Teacher-related Influences, the Curriculum, Student-related Influences, the Physical Space, and the importance of considering the environment as a Balancing Act. These themes encompassed individual needs and characteristics, how the space impacts the learning, and the built environment components. The Balancing Act is viewed as an overarching theme, that is influenced by all other components. Conclusion The study identified the complex interplay of factors teachers take account of when designing their classroom. It is clear that it is a ‘balancing act’ with competing considerations. Both theoretical frameworks were found to involve key aspects that related to this study’s findings. However, neither considers teacher-related influences; the SCM makes no mention of teachers, and the school-based PEO only deems teacher/student relationships worthy of consideration. The uniqueness of the study is bringing this information to OTPs as understanding the teachers’ perspective is key to these practitioners making classroom environment recommendations that are adapted to the actuality. References Delport, S. M., & Hasselbusch, A. (2011). Applying Sensory Integration in School-Based Occupational Therapy: Enabling Participation in School Occupations. https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/16411/1/Applying%20Sensory%20Integration%20in%20School-Based%20Occupational%20Therapy%20- %20Enabling%20Participation%20in%20School%20Occupations.pdf Gislason, N. (2009). Mapping school design: A qualitative study of the relations among facilities design, curriculum delivery, and school climate. The Journal of Environmental Education, 40(4), 17-34. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.40.4.17-34 Grandisson, M., Rajotte, É., Godin, J., Chrétien-Vincent, M., Milot, É., & Desmarais, C. (2020). Autism spectrum disorder: How can occupational therapists support schools? Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 87(1), 30-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008417419838904 Wintle, J., Krupa, T., DeLuca, C., & Cramm, H. (2022). Toward a conceptual framework for occupational therapist-teacher collaborations. Journal of Occupational Therapy, Schools, & Early Intervention, 15(2), 148-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/19411243.2017.1359134

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,059
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,084
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,059
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,313

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0590,084
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,011
Communication savante0,0100,007
Science ouverte0,0030,006
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,006
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,072
Tête enseignante GPT0,345
Écart entre enseignants0,273 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Medicine ForumMême sujetMagnetic confinement fusion researchTravaux en français237 207