Variability and barriers to learning: The perspectives and practices of math teachers in general education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite having disability rights and the benefit of legislation, students with disabilities in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) receive insufficient special education and inclusive support.A Guide for Ensuring Inclusion and Equity in Education (UNESCO, 2017) regards learner variability and identification of the barriers to learning as foundational concepts to making progress in inclusive practices that align with the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) approach initiated by Rose and Meyer (2002).This qualitative study explores the perspectives of general education teachers (Ged) from leading expatriate schools in the Kingdom on these core concepts and how they address these issues in their daily practice.This multiple case study examines teachers' engagement in inclusive teaching practices by exploring the underlying mechanisms being employed in the classroom (i.e., the anticipation of variability and barriers and intentional alignment of teaching components/curricula with core components of inclusive education).Face-to-face teachers' interviews (one to three hours long), direct classroom observations (five to seven days during math instructions), participant observations, physical artifacts (educational materials) and documents (i.e., lesson plans, assessment sheets, students reflections on their learning, teaching strategies, and rubrics) were used as methods of data collection.Data were gathered from four elementary-middle school math teachers (one male, three female) from two different school districts: Saudi Aramco Expatriate School (SAES) and International School Groups-Dammam (ISG).Ged teachers in SAES showed in-depth theoretical knowledge and positive, adaptive, and malleable beliefs about variability and barriers, they used flexible instructional approaches, and were more likely to establish a non-traditional model of teaching.In contrast, those in ISG showed a more surface-level understanding of these concepts.The study suggests that teachers in Ged settings do not observe anticipation and intentional alignment iii VARIABILITY AND BARRIERS across teaching components.Their curricular planning reflects a tendency to focus on the average students rather than on learner variability and potential barriers.This is the first study to develop evaluation criteria for anticipation and intentional alignment for UDL research.It also provides a universally designed blueprint for educators to practice anticipation and intentional alignment across lesson planning, learning environment, teaching methods, materials, and assessment using the core components of inclusive practices and UDL principles.Finally, the study suggests that participants in private international schools of KSA have a strong basis for initiating inclusive education models as several elements in their current teaching practices are in line with core inclusive practices in research.Recommendations are suggested to private international schools and education policymakers to facilitate inclusive education in the Kingdom.doctoral program of Human Development with her compassionate support and encouragement.Thank you, Tara, for your continuous support with insightful advice and guidance throughout during past 7 academic years.
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 | 0.003 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".