The impact of direct experience on preservice teachers’ self-efficacy for teaching in inclusive classrooms
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With current inclusion trends, teacher educators are challenged to redesign their programmes to prepare preservice teachers to educate a wide range of students in whole-class settings. This quantitative study examined the impact of an inclusion course and a field experience on preservice teachers' self-efficacy for teaching in inclusive classrooms. Based on data collected from 141 participants, the results indicated that both the inclusion course and the field experience produced significant gains in self-efficacy. Participants with prior experience with people with exceptional needs had significantly higher levels of self-efficacy than those without prior experience; however, both groups experienced significant gains after the course and the field experience. Also, the results showed that, during the field experience, as preservice teachers spent more time with direct, individual instruction with students with exceptional needs, and less time with observation and whole-class instruction, their self-efficacy was more likely to increase. Findings were discussed, and implications for practice and future research were suggested.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it