MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120313036 · doi:10.5206/eei.v30i3.13510

An Examination of Inclusive Practices for Students with Learning Disabilities in Botswana: A Literature Review

2020· review· en· W3120313036 on OpenAlex
Samantha Mrstik, Lisa Dieker, C.O. Abosi

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueExceptionality Education International · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsInclusion (mineral)Political scienceSpecial educationCoping (psychology)Economic growthPedagogySociologyPublic administrationPsychologySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The country of Botswana has passed laws to support the human rights of their citizens, including people with learning disabilities. In accordance with the United Nations’ guidelines, Botswana’s human rights initiatives, and the international movement toward inclusive education, inclusive educational reform is taking place. We have conducted a comprehensive literature review, the purpose of which was to establish the progress Botswana has made in special education policy, implementation of policy into schools, and the strides made toward inclusion. However, there are still many struggles comparable to many school systems in African nations. Key findings include a nation with significant developments in human rights which includes a developing inclusive education system with both policy and implementation, yet, still coping with the growing pains of a young special education program.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.856

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.463 · 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