The comparison of educationary, legislative and conceptual documents of the Czech Republic, France and the province of Quebec focused on pupils with special educational needs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the bachelor's thesis is to describe and compare the education of pupils and students with special educational needs in the Czech Republic, France and Quebec on the basis of legislative and conceptual documents. In accordance with the formulated goal, documents of ministries of education and upbringing of individual countries and other legislative documents concerning inclusive education of pupils with special educational needs are analyzed and compared. Subsequently, partial goals are formulated: comparison of education of pupils with special educational needs and comparison of education, competencies and work of a teaching assistant. The work is divided into theoretical and practical part. The first block of the theoretical part presents the educational systems of individual countries. The second block is devoted to the description of the education of children, pupils and students with special educational needs, as they are legally defined in individual countries. The practical part focuses on the analysis and comparison of individual subjects. The core of the practical part is a specific comparison of principles and possibilities of supporting inclusive education in individual countries. A qualitative strategy is chosen to meet the above objectives, and the data collection technique used is comparative analysis. Secondly, a semi-structured interview and observation is used. The work can be beneficial for students of pedagogically oriented programs as well as for the pedagogical public. The results of the bachelor's thesis can serve at the application level as inspiring materials for the creation of innovations in the education of pupils and students with special educational needs in the Czech Republic. The results of the comparison showed differences in the approach to the education of pupils with special needs. The terms integration/inclusion partially coincide, intersect. In practical application, inclusive education has different interpretations in different countries. The comparison of the position and education of teaching assistants revealed differences, especially in the level of work content and personal competencies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".