Education of Children with Intellectual Disabilities in <scp>S</scp>lovenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the Republic of Slovenia, the concept of inclusion was formally codified with the adoption of the Placement of Children with Special Needs Act (2000, 2007), which calls for inclusive education of students with special needs in settings as close to their homes as possible. Despite numerous innovations, Slovenian legislation still maintains a dual education system. Some students with special needs are educated separately from age peers in special schools/institutions (specialization), while others attend regular schools along with age peers (inclusion). This dichotomy results from thinking that many children with special needs (especially those with intellectual disability) are not able to achieve at the standards set for their age peers, that schools have not provided adapted programs to accommodate lower expectations of academic achievement, that many Slovenian school teachers do not have suitable skills and knowledge appropriate for educating children with special needs, and that most schools lack the capacity and resources that permit teachers to focus on children with special needs. Strategies for bringing about needed changes in practice are required, and some of these key strategies include: enforce the legal provisions enabling children with special needs to receive appropriate schooling; institute prevention processes of the improper placement of children with disabilities; constitute a strategic plan for effective inclusive education of children with intellectual disability; comprehensively monitor and evaluate education practices and inform education policy‐makers of findings; and involve special schools and institutions in the implementation of inclusion of students with intellectual disability in regular schools.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".