Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian perspective of inclusive education is unique to its history and social context. In some ways, Canada has pioneered theories, frameworks and practices that have greatly influenced the ways nations build inclusive educational experiences. While Canadian practices have evolved, a great deal remains to be done. It is the intention of this article to provide a general context from which Canada’s present forms of inclusive education have grown. This is presented as context from which readers may find insights related to their own current practices and future visions of inclusive education. Internationally, Canada reaches out to learn and share practices and principles of learning inclusively with other nations in an effort to improve the practices of all in such partnerships. These partnerships and sharing of information internationally support building better communities of belonging and open intellectual doors of thought not possible if one remains only within one’s own context. Inclusive education is indeed a worldwide effort, the final analysis of which has not yet begun.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.049 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".