MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997138603

Ways to be a person: How schools contribute to ‘making up’ intellectually disabled pupils

2019· dissertation· en· W2997138603 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Øyvind Ibrahim Marøy Snipstad

Bibliographic record

VenueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHøgskolen i Innlandet
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPedagogyMathematics education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How do ‘kinds’ of knowledge and practices existing within schools contribute to\n‘making up’ intellectually disabled pupils in relation to perspectives on inclusion?\nThis project departs from a micro-perspective on inclusion where the object of study is the\nprocesses that take place within educational institutions and between actors in the classrooms\nand other contexts at schools. Based on this, the dissertation aims to understand how\neducation contributes to ‘making up’ intellectually disabled pupils. Drawing on the theoretical\nworks of the Canadian philosopher Ian Hacking, this project discusses how produced\nknowledge, stereotypical assumptions, values, beliefs and so on that are implemented in the\ncategory ‘intellectual disability’ affect organisational practices, which in turn interact with the\nchildren classified as intellectually disabled and influence how they understand themselves\nand their surroundings.\nThe dissertation consists of three articles that are based on empirical data gathered from three\npupils diagnosed with intellectual disability. The three informants are each devoted their own\narticle. Individually the articles discuss different issues and themes related to different\ndimensions of inclusion, respectively: participation, fellowship, democracy and benefit. Based\non the mentioned perspectives on inclusion, the purpose of the articles is to discuss how\nintellectual disability as a category affects the surroundings attitudes, practices, assumptions,\nunderstandings and so on, which in turn provides certain descriptions from which the\nclassified pupils experience, behave and act.\nThe project argues that the beliefs and practices that pupils classified as intellectually disabled\nare subjected to in school play a major role in regards to the kind of person it is possible for\nthem to be. When education is organised based on beliefs that intellectual disability refers to\npupils that deviate from others, the descriptions available for them to interact with will also be\nof a deviant kind. On the other hand, if education provides descriptions related to high\nexpectations, ambitions and opportunities for all, the way in which it is possible to be a pupil\nfor children classified as intellectually disabled might thus resemble normalised descriptions\nsimilar to those available to their peers. Just as interacting with perspectives that consider\nintellectually disabled children as different or special might construct barriers relating to\nnormative standards of society, more socially oriented approaches to education might\ncontribute to deconstructing barriers for present and future participation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDuo Research Archive (University of Oslo)Same topicChildren's Rights and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207