Attributional Beliefs of Canadian Trainee Teachers toward Students with a Learning Disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Teachers are one of the most important factors in successful inclusion of students with a learning disability in mainstream classrooms. Attitudes towards inclusion of certain students in classrooms have been mixed, and many attitudes are often developed during the pre-service training and early teaching years. This study investigated the attitudes of trainee teachers towards students with learning disabilities by analysing their attributional responses to hypothetical students. Accordingly, 181 graduating Canadian trainee teachers were surveyed and the results indicated that as students’ ability levels decrease, teachers’ sympathy levels rise, and the expectation of future failure increases. Moreover, as students’ expended efforts increase, the teacher feedback becomes more positive, the frustration decreases, the sympathy levels rise, and the expectation of future failure decreases. With regards to differences between students with and without a learning disability, as students’ ability levels increase the difference in trainee teachers’ sympathy level increases. Furthermore, as students’ expended efforts increase, the difference in teacher feedback given to students with and without a learning disability decreases, the difference in frustration and sympathy levels decrease, and the difference in expectations of future failure increases. Implications and recommendations for practice and research conclude the paper.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 teacher head, 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".