Can Teachers’ Self-Reported Efficacy, Concerns, and Attitudes Toward Inclusion Scores Predict Their Actual Inclusive Classroom Practices?
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
This research was undertaken to determine if significant relationships exist between teachers’ self-reported attitudes, concerns, and efficacy to teach in inclusive classrooms and their actual classroom behaviour in Winnipeg, Canada. Five teachers completed 3 scales measuring their attitudes to inclusion, their level of concerns about teaching in inclusive classrooms, and their level of efficacy for teaching in inclusive classrooms. They were observed using a newly developed scale to measure their inclusive teaching practices. Each teacher was observed from 3 to 5 hours on different occasions. Data were analysed using 1-tailed Spearman correlations. Results indicated that teachers who were highly inclusive in their classroom practices tended to have significantly lower degrees of concerns and positive attitudes to inclusion. Implications of the research for policymakers, future researchers, and teacher educators are discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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