MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802204012 · doi:10.1017/jsi.2018.2

(Re)-Defining ‘Teacher’: Preservice Teachers with Disabilities in Canadian Teacher Education Programs

2018· article· en· W2802204012 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alina Wilson, Laura Sokal, Deb Woloshyn

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Journal of Special and Inclusive Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsPracticumTeacher educationStrict constructionismPedagogyMathematics educationPsychologySpecial educationTeacher preparationSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Directors of Student Teaching from the Western Canadian provinces participated in focus groups about the realities and decision-making processes around practicum for preservice teachers with disabilities. Results showed current standards, when applied rigidly, served to reify a static, homogenous, and unrealistic definition of ‘teacher’ that marginalises preservice teachers with disabilities. However, the effort of directors to challenge this notion of ‘teacher’, framed within the constructionist model of disability, gives hope for a more inclusive future teaching force.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.548
Threshold uncertainty score0.793

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.314 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian Journal of Special and Inclusive EducationSame topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207