Accommodations in Teacher Education: Perspectives of Teacher Candidates with Learning Disabilities and their Faculty Advisors
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
This study of teacher candidates with learning disabilities profiles their experi-ence in a teacher education program. Two teacher candidates and their faculty advisors offer perspectives at various points during the teacher education pro-gram. Findings indicate that the teacher candidates were able to complete their required courses when their professors facilitated appropriate accommodations for them. In their elementary classroom practica, the participants thrived when teaching in their trained discipline or content area, but often needed scaffolding from teacher associates when teaching mathematics and reading. Prior to dis-closing their disability to their teacher associates, the teacher candidates attempted to gauge their mentors’ tolerance of learning disabilities. Based on their lived experiences, the participants held distinct beliefs about integration and reducing the stigma of learning disabilities. Discussion on the implications for teacher education and support of teacher candidates with learning disabilities is offered.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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