MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Review Study of Inclusive Education

2023· review· en· W4388270394 on OpenAlexaff
Wenxu Qian, Yinhang Rong

Bibliographic record

VenueLecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecial needsSpecial educationPsychologyInclusion (mineral)Universal designAnxietyPedagogyMedical educationMathematics educationMedicineComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on inclusive education and special needs groups. Inclusive education ensures equal opportunities for learning and access to education for all students, including those with disabilities. Special needs refer to disabilities that require specialized services or accommodations. Inclusive education practices involve instruction and support in a grade-level classroom with same-aged peers, specialized classrooms or settings, and inclusive teaching strategies. The benefits of inclusive education need to extend to all students, including gifted and general students. Still, there are also challenges, such as inadequate infrastructure and facilities, the need for additional resources and training for teachers, and the difficulty of providing individualized learning programs.Additionally, there may be issues with bullying and the need for cooperation from various stakeholders. Inclusive education is crucial for instilling healthy thoughts and tolerance in children and creating a less prejudiced world. The importance of inclusive education for children’s growth psychology is highlighted, along with its benefits and challenges in implementation. Suggestions are provided to create a positive learning environment and improve student and teacher relationships to reduce stress and anxiety.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.419 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public MediaSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207