MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6980698111

COMMUNITY INTEGRATION THROUGH COOPERATIVE EDUCATION (CICE): A POST-SECONDARY WORLD FIT FOR ALL

2022· article· en· W6980698111 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiotechnology and Related Fields
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformational leadershipPlan (archaeology)Cooperative educationContext (archaeology)Action planInstitutionHigher educationSet (abstract data type)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.108
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicBiotechnology and Related FieldsFrench-language works237,207