Inclusive Postsecondary Education for People with Intellectual Disabilities: Teaching Methodologies and Practices of Translating Rights into Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Article 24 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) forms the cornerstone of the right to “inclusive education”, outlining in subsection 1 that, States “shall ensure an inclusive education system at all levels” (2006). The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has stated that inclusion “involves a process of systemic reform embodying changes and modifications in content, teaching methods, approaches, structures and strategies in education” (2016, [11]). However, this right to inclusive education has not been realised in any systematic way for students with intellectual disabilities (ID) in Postsecondary education (PSE). This article will (1) explore the right to inclusive education for people with disability established under the CRPD (2) review existing research on pedagogies and practices for teaching students with ID in PSE models in Ireland, Canada, the US and Australia, (3) describe how a rights-based PSE programme was developed in an Irish university (UCC), and (4) argue that critical reflection, documentation and sharing of pedagogies and practices of rights-based PSE is key to development and dissemination of practice insights in this emergent field of education.
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 | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".