Against performativity: towards a comprehensive model for inclusive education
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inclusive education has become a generally accepted approach to promoting education for children with disabilities worldwide. Both global governance organisations and national governments have called for greater inclusivity in education systems. As such, implementing organisations have sought to demonstrate their programmes align with policy trends and often apply the term ‘inclusive’ to their educational programmes. In this article, we argue that some of these activities are performative and use inclusive terminology to describe activities that may only partially address inclusive outcomes. As an example, we draw upon data from United States Agency for International Development (USAID) programmes that conceptualised inclusion in three different ways. We reflect on lessons learned from these programmes and introduce the concept of ‘comprehensive’ inclusive education as a counterweight to performative inclusive education. We conclude by offering an array of practices and policies that may inform comprehensiveness for education programmes.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it