MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231571207 · doi:10.20489/intjecse.239574

Voices of  American and Israeli Early Childhood Educators on Inclusion

2016· article· en· W4231571207 on OpenAlexaff
Shelley T. Alexander, David L. Brody, Meir Muller, Haggith Gor Ziv, Sigal Achituv, Chaya R. Gorsetman, Janet Harris, Clodie Tal, Roberta Goodman, Deborah Schein, Ilene Vogelstein, Lyndall Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Early Childhood Special Education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)PsychologyEarly childhoodPolitical scienceDevelopmental psychologySociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines Israeli and American teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion in early childhood and specifically explores the problems and opportunities concerning inclusion in the United States and Israel that arise in Jewish education. Through semi-structured interviews, four Israeli and three American educators participating in communities of practice were asked to look at themselves and the beliefs that inform their attitudes towards inclusion. The researchers created a qualitative rubric suitable to analyze the interviews from participants. Results indicate that a majority of the teachers voiced support for inclusion of children with special needs but felt tension in implementing an inclusive classroom due to multiple variables. The most challenging issues for the teachers involve lack of efficacy, lack of support, balancing needs of all stakeholders, and family cooperation. The article concludes with recommendations to leaders and policy makers about the needs of teachers to more effectively achieve high quality inclusive classrooms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Early Childhood Special EducationSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207