Becoming a student representative in Brazil: a phenomenological study of students with intellectual disabilities
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The gap between social participation and inclusive education policies highlights a lack of participation and opportunities for decision-making among people with intellectual disabilities (ID). In particular, the underrepresentation of students with ID in representative roles in schools underscores the need to consider notions of in-school participation. Based on Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology perspective, this study investigates the lived experience of all stakeholders involved in the process of students with ID becoming representatives in a Brazilian school. Several collaborative preparatory meetings were held with key stakeholders. The six participants interviewed were the teacher of the resource room, two student representatives with ID, the pedagogical coordinators, and a mother of the student representative. The results showed that the students’ representation was an inclusive practice that allowed students to develop advocacy skills. This study contributes with a practical application on how a school can create opportunities for students to voice their collaboration in the Global South.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it