Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Canada often is regarded as a leading nation in the area of inclusive education and disability. As Andreas Hinz (2006) of Germany writes, Canada “has made inclusion a hallmark of its educational systems”. This view is valid regarding four of the 13 provincial and territorial jurisdictions in Canada. Following the advent of Inclusive Education as a more socially just approach to education and students with disabilities, different understandings have developed across the nation. Nine governments consider Inclusive Education to be a value system that does not mandate education in the same classrooms for all students. These governments maintain the Special Education Model for those students considered unable to benefit from education in the same classrooms as their typical peers. The three northern Territories and the Atlantic province of New Brunswick also believe inclusive education to be a value system. However, these jurisdictions have moved beyond the Special Education Model and its dependency on various levels of segregation for many students with disabilities. On the basis of social justice and stronger academic and social education, these four education systems are developing and employing organizational and pedagogical strategies that support inclusion of all students in regular classroom settings."
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".