MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948262082

Rethinking Teacher Education for Inclusion: A Literature Review

2019· review· en· W2948262082 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)PedagogySociologyMathematics educationPsychologyMedical educationMedicineGender studies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article constitutes a literature review on teacher education for inclusion. The review examines related Canadian and international research from a policy perspective and argues for reconsidering the concept of inclusion in teacher education programming to further advance the learning experiences of those who come from diverse backgrounds. The review sheds light on the existing views, beliefs, and policy practices of those involved in teacher education and attends to the processes of translating inclusion policy principles into the practices of practitioners situated in various school contexts. Further, the review examines issues of funding along with the organizational and instructional strategies that would promote teacher education for inclusion in Ontario and beyond. A concluding summary and implications for future research are offered.

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.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.361
GPT teacher head0.635
Teacher spread0.275 · 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