MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Peculiarities of International and Domestic Experiences in the Development of Inclusion in Higher Education Institutions

2019· article· en· W2972439622 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Khrystyna Drymalovska

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness Inform · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicForeign Language Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Political scienceEconomic growthDevelopment economicsSociologyEconomicsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The publication is aimed at researching the peculiarities of domestic and international experiences in the development of inclusion in higher education institutions (HEI). On the basis of studying the works of scholars, the stages in development of education for persons with special needs in Ukraine are presented; forms of education for students with special needs are presented; differences in the inclusive forms of learning from others are specified. The international experience in the development of an inclusive approach is studied on the examples of universities in Canada, the United States, the European University Viadrina, the University of Oslo, the Masaryk University. The peculiarities of the introduction and implementation of inclusion in the Ukrainian HEI are considered using such examples as the National University «Lviv Polytechnika», the Petro Mohyla Black Sea National University, the National Technical University «Igor Sikorsky Polytechnic Institute of Kyiv», the State University of Sumy. A plan for the development of inclusion in the HEI is formed together with the identification of its main directions and ways of implementation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0010.015
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness InformSame topicForeign Language Teaching MethodsFrench-language works237,207