Moving Toward Inclusion: Inclusion Coaches' Reflections and Discussions in Supporting Educators in Practice
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
When school systems and administrations provide educators with opportunities to engage in transformative learning through reflective practice and provide opportunities to challenge their beliefs, educator pedagogy for inclusive education can be enhanced (Evans, 1997; Pyhältö et al., 2012; Richardson, 1998). Our research examined the experiences of 11 inclusion coaches while they provided support and built capacity for 38 educators during a change in special education service delivery, seeking insight into the effectiveness of this coaching model. Coaches’ experiences were shared during semi-focused group discussions and via an online blog. Qualitative analysis revealed coaches’ roles in this context were influenced by their personal expectations, personal growth, support for one another, and support for respective educators. The findings from this research are pivotal for pedagogy and teaching philosophy in inclusion.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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