“We Need Structures in Place”: Educators’ Experiences With Special Education at International Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article engages the construct of the policyscape to explore how educators have experienced policy-to-practice dissonances when working at international schools overseas. Extracted from a qualitative study of educator acculturation in the context of the lived experiences of 17 kindergarten–Grade 12 expatriate teachers, counsellors, and school leaders at international schools in five regions in Southeast and East Asia, this subset of findings explores the most prevalent policyscape manifestations that emerged in the study. These manifestations involve issues about supporting students with known or probable “special education” needs. Findings include widespread perceptions by the participants of inadequate policy and program infrastructure to properly support students with special needs. These inadequacies ranged from identification processes, school and staff capacity, and leadership gaps, and they were further mired by ideological and cultural differences noted by stakeholder groups. Participants with local cultural mentors experienced greater self-efficacy and leadership capacity in addressing the policyscape manifestations. The study was exploratory, with the findings informing a research agenda to further investigate some of the gaps that emerged in the findings.
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 | 0.014 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".