MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7143845937 · doi:10.14943/b.edu.146.223

大学における教育支援の公平性の確保 : 合理的配慮を必要とする学生への支援に基づく検討

2025· article· ja· W7143845937 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maiko Aoki, Hyeseon Jung, Junko SATO

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Robotics and Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccommodationJudgementReasonable accommodationSecond languageInclusion (mineral)Higher education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Japan, based on the Act for the Eliminating Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities in 2006, all business operators have been obliged to provide reasonable accommodation from April 2024 onwards. Universities have been working to develop support systems including the physical environment, but it is difficult to share information about reasonable accommodation due to the need to protect personal information, and there is not much research on the subject. In particular many aspects of activities in the classroom are left to the judgement of the lecturers, and in Japanese language classes, which often include collaborative activities, there are many lecturers who struggle to respond to students who have difficulty participating in these activities. In this paper, based on interviews to relevant staff conducted at universities in Canada, Australia and South Korea, we will clarify that the number of students with learning disabilities and other characteristics that are not easily apparent from appearances is increasing worldwide, and that this is leading to a fundamental shift in teaching and learning. We will then consider the environment and particularly the role of lecturers necessary for creating inclusive classroom settings, using Japanese language lessons at Hokkaido University as a reference in future classroom activities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicEducational Robotics and EngineeringFrench-language works237,207