Experiences of Dutch and Swedish Occupational Therapists and Teachers of Their Context-Based Collaboration in Elementary Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context-based collaboration between teachers and occupational therapists has shown promise as a strategy to enhance teachers’ capacity to enable the participation of children in elementary schools. In this study, we applied the Canadian Partnering for Change (P4C) model as a collaborative, coaching- and context-based approach in the Netherlands and Sweden. The aim was to gain insight into teachers’ and occupational therapists’ experiences of their collaboration applying P4C within their specific European elementary school context. To this end, we held semi-structured interviews with 4 teachers and 4 occupational therapists and performed a conventional, inductive content analysis of the ensuing interview transcripts. We found that participants’ collaboration in the classroom context was a continuous, multi-stage process that we defined as a unique mastery journey toward collaborative learning and trustful partnership. Participants indicated that they needed time to become familiar with the new collaboration, how they learned from each other, and that they enhanced children’s inclusion by applying strategies collaboratively. The results carry implications for the embedment of collaboration in schools and offer relevant strategies that serve the inclusion of all children. We propose that future studies evaluate the effects of P4C and seek to obtain a holistic picture of collaboratively applied actions.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".