COMMUNITY INTEGRATION THROUGH COOPERATIVE EDUCATION (CICE): A POST-SECONDARY WORLD FIT FOR ALL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Students with developmental disabilities are a growing and diverse population. Higher education landscapes are becoming increasingly complex. Despite academic and personal supports available to all Ontario college students through student services centers, Marshall College (a pseudonym) is experiencing a disconnect between the stated vision, mission, and values and the Community Integration Through Cooperative Education (CICE) program and its students. Diverse views have polarized senior administration, faculty, and staff on how to adapt to having students with developmental disabilities accessing post-secondary education through the CICE program. This Organizational Improvement Plan explores the organizational context of Marshall College and proposes an improvement plan to address the problem of practice, which is how to improve the lack of integration experienced by the CICE program and its students. As the faculty coordinator of the CICE program, I have created a change improvement plan to guide the change process. The problem of practice is framed with the interpretivist, social constructivism epistemology, and Capper’s (2019) Disabilities Studies in Education epistemology. The plan’s predominant leadership frameworks, transformational and authentic leadership, combined with Kotter’s (1996, 2012) eight-step change model is used to create a plan of action that encompasses key stakeholders with well-defined roles and responsibilities to enact the proposed change. The plan-do-study-act cycle is used to monitor and evaluate the plan and I incorporate detailed plans for communicating the need for change while ensuring collaboration amongst all stakeholders. I conclude with a pathway forward within this institution and set the groundwork for future change.\nKeywords: developmental disabilities, integration, post-secondary education, transformational leadership, authentic leadership
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.026 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".