Experiences matter: Educators’ attitudes toward disability in higher education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated 128 post-secondary educators’ attitudes toward disability at a college and a university in southwestern Ontario, Canada. The participants completed the Educators’ Attitudes toward Disability Scale (EADS) and a demographic questionnaire that included questions about their experiences with disability. There were three research questions at the heart of this study: (1) What are post-secondary educators’ overall attitudes toward disability? (2) Do demographic factors predict post-secondary educators’ attitudes toward disability? (3) Does exposure to people with disability predict post-secondary educators’ attitudes toward disability? The findings of this study suggest post-secondary educators hold overallpositive attitudes toward disability and there were very few differences observed between groups (e.g., based on age, gender, discipline, etc.). Educators’ experiences with people who have a disability, however, were positively associated with their attitudes. This factor included personal experiences (e.g., friends, family, etc.), but also professional experiences (e.g., students in their classes).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 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 teacher head, 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".