Breaking Barriers: A Blended Mosaic Model of Inclusion for English Language Learners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This organizational improvement plan (OIP) presents a holistic, authentic, and proactive inclusion plan for English language learners (ELLs) at Graus Secondary School (GSS). It is framed around a problem of practice (PoP) that emerged due to an influx of newcomers to Ontario in 2016. This OIP proposes a solution to the inevitable exclusion that ELLs experience, builds on existing initiatives and offers additional support to administrators and school staff that maximizes authentic inclusion in the reception and inclusion of incoming ELLs. This solution, the author’s blended mosaic model of inclusion (BMMI), transforms the view of diversity from a fixed mosaic to a blended one that allows space for critical dialogue and authentic connection. This OIP is guided by social justice leadership and the PoP is framed by critical race theory (CRT) and critical sociocultural theory. The leadership approaches to change adopted are for a culturally responsive, social justice, and transformative leadership. Combined, these leadership approaches bridge gaps in the required conditions for equitable learning opportunities that are inclusive of and responsive to ELLs’ needs. A combination of Kang et al.’s (2020) and Deszca et al.’s (2020) change path models is used to outline the process of change. The change implementation plan outlines goals and priorities through the BMMI to close the gap between the current and desired states for ELLs. The monitoring and evaluation plan combines assessments before, during, and after change implementation, and the PDSA model, and is guided by the chosen change path model and leadership approaches.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".