MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Preparing new teachers for inclusive schools and classrooms

2006· article· en· W2148066245 on OpenAlexaff
Eileen Winter

Bibliographic record

VenueSupport for Learning · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamInclusion (mineral)LegislationSpecial educational needsPedagogyMainstreamingWork (physics)Teacher preparationPsychologyPolitical scienceMedical educationPerceptionSpecial educationMathematics educationTeacher educationPublic relationsMedicineEngineeringSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The policy of including pupils with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools and classes is now firmly established in many jurisdictions worldwide. Successful implementation of such policy depends largely on teachers having the knowledge, skills and competencies necessary to make it work. This poses a considerable challenge for both teachers and those responsible for Initial Teacher Education (ITE). This article presents the results of a study investigating current Northern Ireland practitioners' perceptions of their initial ITE relative to SEN. The major question under investigation was whether they felt that their ITE prepared them to be effective teachers in inclusive settings. Findings confirm research in other jurisdictions that teachers feel unprepared for inclusion. Emerging from this are the participants' recommendations for the content and delivery of SEN courses in ITE. Their recommended model of SEN delivery is a combination of ‘permeation’ plus a ‘stand alone’ course with the focus on student characteristics, behaviour management, assessment and evaluation, and SEN legislation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations123
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSupport for LearningSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207