MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612153272

Teachers’ Experiences with the Inclusion of Students with Special Needs in Physical Education

2017· article· en· W2612153272 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kaitlyn Mullett

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)PedagogyMathematics educationPsychologyMedical educationSociologySocial psychologyMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this qualitative study was to investigate the experiences of Ontario certified teachers with the inclusion of children with special needs in physical education. Data was gathered through the process of convenience sampling and semi-structured interview, from four teacher participants. Following the interviews, a rigorous analysis revealed three important themes. The first finding explored connections between professional development, number of years teaching, and the amount support from other professionals and the effect on the confidence of teachers’ inclusive practices. This gave novel insight into the need for support in the physical space of the gym, and the need for professional collaboration. Challenges for implementation of inclusive physical education have us insightful information about the lack of adapted equipment in physical education environments. Lastly, teachers’ practices related to inclusive physical education were explored which provides examples of practical strategies that educators are currently using to support children with special needs in inclusive physical education programs. This research is important for all members of the educational community in order for schools to promote the benefits of physical education to all students.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.407 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicInclusion and Disability in Education and SportFrench-language works237,207