MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296113993 · doi:10.5430/jct.v11n6p100

Subjects Adaptation Techniques for Primary School Pupils with Special Educational Needs

2022· article· en· W4296113993 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Oksana Hnoievska, Iryna Omelchenko, Vadym Кobylchenko, Marianna Klyap, Oksana Shkvyr

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Inclusion (mineral)CurriculumSpecial educational needsSpecial needsScale (ratio)Special educationMathematics educationPsychologyMainstreamingPedagogyWork (physics)Medical educationMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research on the adaptation of children with disabilities in general education institutions is topical, as the education of children with special educational needs provides helps them to acquire a profession and become self-sufficient. The aim of this work was to develop subjects adaptation techniques for primary school pupils with special educational needs. The teachers’ attitudes to inclusive education were determined through the Attitudes Towards Inclusion Scale (AIS Scale). The Teacher Efficacy for Inclusive Practices (TEIP) Scale was used to establish the teachers’ effectiveness in implementing inclusive practices. The Concerns about Inclusive Education Scale (CIES) was used to study concerns about inclusive education, while the intention to teach in an inclusive classroom was identified through the Intention to Teach in Inclusive Classroom Scale (ITICS). The impact of general education alongside ordinary children on children with special educational needs was determined through Stott’s Observation Charts. The techniques proposed in this study involve the use of different methods, tools, technologies by teachers that are required for the adaptation and correction of subjects. It is necessary to take into account the individual capabilities of pupils with special educational needs, as well as to meet the educational needs of ordinary pupils. It is worth to further work on finding new methods and techniques for adapting curricula to the inclusive educational environment based on new advances in pedagogy and innovative technologies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.625
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicInclusion and Disability in Education and SportFrench-language works237,207