MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2595440886

Teachers' view on early childhood special education : A case of Livingstone

2011· dissertation· en· W2595440886 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Litia Nyaywa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecial educationEarly childhoodEarly childhood educationHead teachersPsychologyPedagogyMedical educationMathematics educationMedicineDevelopmental psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to investigate the views of teachers on early childhood special education in basic schools of Livingstone district of Zambia. In the present study, early childhood special education referred to an educational arrangement in which learners with special educational needs have access to early childhood care and development facilities in our education system from pre¬school age. Studies undertaken in other countries such as the United States of America, Canada, Australia, Japan, the United Kingdom and some parts of Europe and Africa have indicated that early childhood special education works well. This may be due to the fact that these nations have realized that early childhood special education, like any other education, pays off well in that these children find more success in later life. The study was therefore, carried out to investigate the nature of teachers' views on early childhood special education in the Livingstone district. The study had 110 respondents who participated in it. The respondents consisted of the head teachers (N = 11), basic school teachers (N=36); special education teachers (N=29); pre-school teachers (N=26) and high school teachers (N=8). Questionnaires and interviews were used to obtain information from respondents. Frequencies and percentages were used to analyse the quantitative data obtained. The responses from interviews were coded and grouped to establish the emerging themes in the study. The study found that teachers were in favour of early childhood special education. in In addition, the study established that type of training teachers underwent was not a potent factor in teachers' views on early childhood special education. Length of service of a teacher, educational resources and information on early childhood special education were significant in teachers' views on early childhood special education. Teachers preferred learners with mild and moderate special education needs to be included in mainstream facilities. The teachers indicated that learners with severe and profound special educational needs should be cared for in separate facilities in the education system. Arising from the results of this study, the present author therefore, would like to make the following recommendations for implementation: • The government needs to put in place a set of laws and policies including a rational plan of action for learners with special education needs that strongly support early childhood special educational care and development. • Localized training should be introduced to both pre-service and in-service teachers in order to support them with relevant skills and knowledge on early childhood special education through teacher training college curriculum and introductory short intensive courses run by colleges of education, standards officers and other stakeholders. • Existing facilities in ordinary schools such as classrooms, furniture, equipment, sanitation and the distribution of resources should be improved and strengthened to enable early childhood special education programmes to be run smoothly.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEarly Childhood Education and Development→French-language works237,207→