Perspectives of Children and Youth With Disabilities and Special Needs Regarding Their Experiences in Inclusive Education: A Meta-Aggregative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inclusive education is important to achieve high-quality education for all; however, there is an important gap in the literature surrounding inclusive education, namely representation of the perspectives of children and youth with disabilities and special needs. In this study, we used a meta-aggregative approach to qualitative evidence synthesis to bring together systematically the perspectives of these children and youth regarding their experiences in inclusive education, and to generate recommendations for action. After selecting and critically appraising the methodological quality of eligible qualitative studies, we extracted the findings from the results sections of 27 studies involving children and youth with various diagnoses and special needs. We aggregated the findings to develop 19 categories, which we further synthesized into six overarching statements pertaining to: (i) teachers’ and education workers’ support and attitudes; (ii) implementation of support and accommodations; (iii) need for safe and accommodating physical environment; (iv) preparation for high school transitions; (v) friendships and peer interactions; and (vi) participants’ own views of themselves. Implications of our findings include: (i) a need for strong leadership at the school level to support implementation of inclusive education; (ii) a need for leadership from government agencies and schools to provide opportunities for teachers to train and collaborate with other professionals; and (iii) a need for flexibility in curriculum and instruction, for which educators require training and experience. Most importantly, our findings show that children and youth with disabilities and special needs, when provided opportunities, demonstrate profound personal understandings of their strengths and needs, their conditions and how these impact their lives, leading to insightful information that can enhance inclusive education practice and policy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.036 | 0.106 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".