MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7144437456

諸外国における「合理的配慮」の捉え方と大学における支援の取り組み : 関係者への聞き取り調査から見えること

2025· article· ja· W7144437456 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maiko AOKI, Hyeseon Jung

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)Feature (linguistics)Learning disabilityLifelong learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this feature articles is to clarify how the provisionof reasonable accommodation, which has been made compulsoryfor all business owners in Japan since April 2024, is understood andimplemented at universities in the UK, Canada, Australia and SouthKorea, based mainly on interviews with those involved in providingsupport on a day-to-day basis. In the Western countries of the UK,Canada and Australia, proactive support is provided based on the‘social model’ of disability, whereas in South Korea, where the‘medical model’ still has a strong influence, a support system is inplace that clearly distinguishes between disability and other mentalillnesses. In addition, while the need for consideration and support forstudents with disabilities and special characteristics is widely sharedin all countries, there were differences in what is considered to be‘reasonable’ depending on the social background and circumstancesof each country. In recent years, the number of students withdisabilities that are not easily apparent from appearances, such asmental illness or developmental or learning disabilitie, has beenincreasing rapidly. In universities, there is a need to share the idealssuch as inclusive education and universal design for learning, butthere is also a need for further consideration of how to guarantee fairand equitable learning opportunities for individual students, as well ashow to guarantee the quality of educational standards.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.316 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicDisability Education and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207