Perspectives of School Leaders on Supporting Learners With Special Education Needs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Ethic of Care Analysis
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 ethic of care is a moral philosophy that has been used to describe and guide the work of educators, especially those working with students with special education needs (SEN). In this study, 36 principals and vice principals from four provinces in Canada were interviewed about their work with students with SEN during the pandemic. Responses were analyzed using the ethic of care framework. Accordingly, responses indicated that principals were particularly aware of, and responsive towards, the wide range of need experienced by students, their families, and school staff. Principals appeared especially concerned about the social needs of their students with SEN, the emotional support needs of the students' families, and the teachers' distress at not being able to meet all the educational needs of their students. Although most principals described the emotional toll of their work during the pandemic, none identified efforts directed towards self-care. This paper considers these findings in regard to motivational displacement as it relates to an ethic of care and calls for a broader consideration of need within education, such that support is extended to students, school staff and school leaders as the most effective means to foster healthy, future-ready schools. Key words: pandemic, principal, inclusive education, ethic of care, mental health.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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