MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393943026 · doi:10.1080/13603116.2024.2337055

‘It is important to be involved’: social participation of autistic children and adolescents in mainstream schools

2024· article· en· W4393943026 on OpenAlexaff
Linda Björk Ólafsdóttir, Barbara E. Gibson, Stefan Hardonk, Snæfríður Þóra Egilson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Inclusive Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersHáskóli Íslands
KeywordsMainstreamMainstreamingAutismPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyInclusion (mineral)PedagogySpecial educationSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through the application of a Bourdieusian lens, this study aimed to contribute insight into social participation of autistic children and adolescents in mainstream schools in Iceland. The objectives were to (a) explore how autistic children and adolescents perceive their social participation in schools and (b) identify structures and processes that facilitate or hinder the children's and adolescents’ participation and social inclusion. Thirteen autistic children and adolescents were interviewed about their participation within different subfields of social relations such as the classroom, cafeteria and playground. The initial inductive analyses drew on Charmaz's constructive grounded theory approach. Then Bourdieu's theory of practice was applied to critically explore identified categories. We describe four categories that reflected processes and structures influencing the participants’ social participation in school: (1) defining and practicing friendships, (2) dealing with a non-accessible environment, (3) being bullied and (4) experiencing lack of social support. Our findings suggest that more focus needs to be directed to the structure and characteristics of different subfields and how they organise the social participation of autistic young people.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.400 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Inclusive EducationSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207