Bringing an Understanding of Elementary School Teachers’ Rationale for their Classroom Design to OT Practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Physical, sensory, and social aspects of the classroom environment directly influence students’ behavior, learning and academic achievement. Both teachers and occupational therapy practitioners (OTPs) approach the design, adaptation, and use of the classroom from their respective knowledge base (Wintle, et al, 2022). Grandisson et al. (2020) noted that OTPs can often know very little about the school personnel, their pedagogy, the school culture, or the classroom routines. This can lead to a disconnect between OTPs recommendations for classroom environment modifications and teachers’ design and use of the same space. Objectives The purpose of this study was to explore the factors that influence elementary-school teachers design and use of their classroom environment and map these factors to an occupational therapy framework. It aimed to advance OTPs awareness of how teachers use the classroom environment, and to explain the facilitators and barriers that impact the classroom environment design from the teachers’ point of view. Methods A qualitative phenomenological study was conducted using virtual semi-structured interviews; which were transcribed. Two coders independently reviewed the transcripts and coded each of them twice; once using the school-based Person-Environment-Occupation model (Hasselbusch, & Dancza, 2012) as a coding matrix and once using the School Climate Model (Gislason, 2018) as a coding matrix. Discrepancies between the coders were discussed until 100% agreement was achieved to ensure credibility and dependability. After the 4th transcript independent intercoder reliability of 80% was reached. An audit trail and reflexivity journal was kept to support transparency, A deductive content analysis approach was completed. Results Five elementary school teachers from the US (n=2), Canada (n=2), and England (n=1) participated in the study. All but one identified as white, they ranged in ages from 29-55 years, and had between 2 and 26 years experience. The analysis reveal five themes: Teacher-related Influences, the Curriculum, Student-related Influences, the Physical Space, and the importance of considering the environment as a Balancing Act. These themes encompassed individual needs and characteristics, how the space impacts the learning, and the built environment components. The Balancing Act is viewed as an overarching theme, that is influenced by all other components. Conclusion The study identified the complex interplay of factors teachers take account of when designing their classroom. It is clear that it is a ‘balancing act’ with competing considerations. Both theoretical frameworks were found to involve key aspects that related to this study’s findings. However, neither considers teacher-related influences; the SCM makes no mention of teachers, and the school-based PEO only deems teacher/student relationships worthy of consideration. The uniqueness of the study is bringing this information to OTPs as understanding the teachers’ perspective is key to these practitioners making classroom environment recommendations that are adapted to the actuality. References Delport, S. M., & Hasselbusch, A. (2011). Applying Sensory Integration in School-Based Occupational Therapy: Enabling Participation in School Occupations. https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/16411/1/Applying%20Sensory%20Integration%20in%20School-Based%20Occupational%20Therapy%20- %20Enabling%20Participation%20in%20School%20Occupations.pdf Gislason, N. (2009). Mapping school design: A qualitative study of the relations among facilities design, curriculum delivery, and school climate. The Journal of Environmental Education, 40(4), 17-34. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.40.4.17-34 Grandisson, M., Rajotte, É., Godin, J., Chrétien-Vincent, M., Milot, É., & Desmarais, C. (2020). Autism spectrum disorder: How can occupational therapists support schools? Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 87(1), 30-41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008417419838904 Wintle, J., Krupa, T., DeLuca, C., & Cramm, H. (2022). Toward a conceptual framework for occupational therapist-teacher collaborations. Journal of Occupational Therapy, Schools, & Early Intervention, 15(2), 148-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/19411243.2017.1359134
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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 it