Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, Sentiments, Attitudes, and Concerns about the Inclusion of Students with Developmental 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
This study examined relationships between three factors related to teacher self-efficacy (use of inclusive instruction, collaboration with others, and managing disruptive behaviour) and practicing teachers’ sentiments, attitudes, and concerns about inclusive education of students with developmental disabilities. We calculated Pearson product-moment correlations to examine individual associations and conducted a series of multiple regression analyses to determine which associated factors, when considered simultaneously, were most predictive. Results indicated that higher self-efficacy for collaboration was the only predictor associated with more positive sentiments and attitudes and with fewer concerns about inclusive education for students with developmental disabilities. The results replicate the findings of a previous study on this topic and highlight the importance of both pre- and in-service education aimed at providing educators with dispositions and skills related to effective collaboration with parents and other members of a school-based team.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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