Parent and Teacher Perspectives on Friendships and Social Interactions of Secondary Students With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Friendships between students with and without intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) remain infrequent, especially at the secondary level. However, when friendships between students with and without IDD have developed, direct support from parents and teachers has been a critical facilitator. Thus, this qualitative study examined parent (n = 10) and teacher (n = 20) perspectives on friendships and social interactions of middle and high school students with IDD receiving special education services in inclusive settings at least part of the day. The data were collected through semi-structured interviews with each participant and analyzed inductively using a multistage process of open and then thematic coding. The thematic findings suggest that the challenge of friendship development between students with and without IDD is ongoing, though there may be potential in focusing more explicitly and intentionally on increasing social interaction opportunities both in and out of school. Implications for future research and practice are described in the context of supporting students with and without IDD to increase social interactions and develop friendships.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".