A systematic review of literature on inclusive education with special emphasis on children with disability in Pakistan
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
Enabling inclusive education and eliminating all differences in education is a key area of Sustainable Development Goals. This systematic review of the literature analysed the major challenges regarding inclusive education in Pakistan. It also studied how these have been investigated by different researchers across the world in the context of a developing country, i.e. Pakistan. The databases searched for carrying out the systematic review were Google Scholar, ERIC, Education Source, ProQuest, JSTOR, Springer, Project Muse, and Informs. The exploration included peer-reviewed research papers from 1980 to 2022 on inclusive education. Approximately 30 research articles were analysed as these met the inclusion criteria. The key findings indicated that global and national policy guidelines are not implemented regarding inclusive education. Moreover, educational institutions in Pakistan are not prepared to cater to children with special educational needs. In addition, the lack of collaboration among all stakeholders and the lack of professionally developed teachers are major challenges towards including these learners. It is recommended that some practical measures need to be taken to implement global and national policy guidelines by the government. To carry out effective implementation of inclusive education collaboration with all stakeholders is recommended.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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