MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389787469 · doi:10.1051/shsconf/202318002010

Teachers’ Approaches to Facilitating Positive Peer Relationships for Students with Disabilities

2023· article· en· W4389787469 on OpenAlexaff
S. Li

Bibliographic record

VenueSHS Web of Conferences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFriendshipOpenness to experiencePsychologyInclusion (mineral)Meaning (existential)Class (philosophy)PedagogyFace (sociological concept)Mathematics educationSocial psychologySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of social openness enables the educational needs of people with disabilities and their right to equal education to be progressively emphasized. More and more students with disabilities started to study in the same class as typically developed students. However, how to help them develop and maintain a positive relationship with peers can be challenging for educators since there exist certain challenges between them in becoming friends. In that case, this paper based on the environment of inclusive education briefly analyzed the benefits of inclusive education and figured out the potential challenges that children with disabilities can face when getting along with typically developed students in the inclusive classroom from both internal and external perspectives. Based on that, the core research question is to help teachers with different roles in an inclusive classroom to find ways of help students with disabilities maintain a positive relationship with other typically developed children to ensure the right of children with all situations are able to receive the same level of education, enjoy the same friendship and help them better adapt into the society in the future life. The meaning of this review is practical which provides educators with approaches to helping children with disabilities and leads to further thinking for researchers about other strategies to help them and offer them a growing-up environment as comfortable as typically developed students. Future research is expected to focus more on the development, well-being and rights of children with disabilities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.237
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSHS Web of ConferencesSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207