MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335857742

Minoritized Parents, Special Education, and Inclusion

2010· dissertation· en· W2335857742 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cameron Darcy Baxter Cobb

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education, India
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Special educationPsychologyPolitical sciencePedagogySociologyGender studies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While there is a large body of literature on the subject of inclusion from a student’s perspective in terms of program delivery, little has been written about how minoritized parents are included in special education processes. This critical study examines how minoritized parents – those who are at times disadvantaged because of how they are differentiated within society – are included in and/or excluded from special education in the varying circumstances associated with this process. To delve into the parameters and implementation of special education identification, placement, and program delivery, I spoke with four minoritized parents and one minoritized youth engagement worker. Additionally, I examined codified policies and regulations, in order to consider how individuals interpret and shape the enactment of this policy within school cultures. In recording and coding the stories of minoritized parents, I have found that Ontario’s system of identification, placement, and program delivery presently leads minoritized parents to experience varying degrees of inclusion and/or exclusion. These degrees may be influenced by a number of circumstances, including how knowledge, language, positioning, and philosophy are presented. As outlined in this paper, Ontario’s Ministry of Education, along with school boards across the province, may pursue a number of different change avenues, and these paths will inevitably lead to different outcomes. While some paths may lead to conflict resolution and enriched inclusion, others may intensify situations of exclusion. Any sort of policy change that sets out to transform special education identification, placement, and program delivery along an Inclusion/Exclusion, Transparency/Opaqueness continuum would ultimately have to address a variety of complications. While the two general forces of larger social context and policy complications are addressed in the concluding chapter of the paper, the specific manner in which they materialize cannot be predicted with complete accuracy. Rather than articulating a detailed set of instructions to redesign policy, I hope to generate critical reflection and discussion on the matter of transforming Ontario’s special education model. If special education inclusion is to be enriched in Ontario, change is imperative.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.401 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207