Implementation of inclusive education for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities in African countries: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To advance understanding of practices that support inclusion of children with intellectual and developmental disabilities in inclusive education classrooms in Africa by conducting a review of the extant literature.Methods: Five academic databases were searched supplemented by a hand search of key journals and references of included studies. Two authors independently screened studies via a reference manager (Covidence) which allowed for blinding. A third author was consulted in cases of conflict.Results: Thirty articles that provided empirical evidence of inclusive education implementation were included. Eight articles highlighted practices that support inclusion of children with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Using Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological framework, findings revealed that inclusive education implementation is influenced by factors on the bio level, micro level, meso level, and macro level. Recommendations for promoting inclusive education implementation are provided.Conclusions: Inclusion goes beyond teachers and requires strong commitment of other stakeholders such as families and governments. To guarantee the smooth inclusion of children with special education needs and particularly with intellectual and developmental disabilities, a set of practices validated through rigorous research as supportive and unique and that can be universal to Africa is wise.Implications for rehabilitationA number of strategies were identified that can improve the classroom inclusion of children with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Development of policies that support such strategies could improve implementation.Inclusion goes beyond teachers. Rehabilitation professionals (i.e. occupational therapists) and educational professionals should partner to identify practical solutions to the challenges of creating inclusive environments for children with special education needs.Committing more resources and time towards the development and implementation of special education policies can advance the successful inclusion of children with special education needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".