Unseen threads: weaving the stories between teacher beliefs and classroom practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative research study examines the relationship between three teacher participants’ beliefs and their classroom practices as it relates to the ongoing implementation of inclusive education and Manitoba’s regulated Bill 13 (Manitoba Education Citizenship and Youth Appropriate Educational Programming 2007). Semi-structured interviews provide personal narratives of beliefs about learning, inclusion and disability. Classroom observations provide an opportunity to examine the influence on practice. Additionally, the study determines if self-described beliefs match observed classroom actions. Findings suggest that there are varying degrees of commitment to inclusive practice which are determined by individual frustrations, teacher confidence, teacher skill levels and understandings of role and responsibility. The conclusion proposes that we continue to have a gap between teacher knowledge and professional actions. It further suggests that inclusion’s implementation will be reliant on individual teacher commitment to fostering inclusive practice in addition to systemic structural reform which supports the ideals of inclusion in relevant and pragmatic ways.
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 | 0.015 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".