Primary/Junior Pre-Service Teachers’ Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceptions of including students with ADHD in the general education classrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Negative attitudes towards students with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) are a lingering challenge in the education system. Teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of ADHD have powerful influences on the ways in which teachers' pedagogical decisions affect their interactions and relationships with students. With ADHD-type behaviours being most prevalent in the primary/junior years, it is imperative that pre-service teachers are adequately prepared to teach students with ADHD. Although students with ADHD are taught predominantly in general education classrooms, studies suggest that many general education teachers lack training in ADHD. The purpose of this study is to address this gap by exploring pre-service teachers’ knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of including students with ADHD in the general education classroom. A mixed-method study was conducted using a sequential explanatory design, examining 35 primary/junior pre-service teachers from an Eastern Ontario University. This submission will focus on the quantitative aspects of this study. Findings of this study could be of interest to Ontario curriculum developers, policy makers, teacher educators, and practicing teachers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".