Identified Teacher Supports for Inclusive 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
This study investigated inclusive practices in Prince Edward Island (PEI) elemen-tary schools in terms of the supports teachers consider as important for inclusion. Twenty teachers were randomly selected to complete a survey, and 5 teachers were randomly selected to participate in an interview about inclusion supports. The survey in this study adapted The School and the Education of All Students Scale. Participants identified and ranked several supports that they deemed im-portant for successful inclusion. The results indicated that elementary teachers in PEI consider certain supports as important when planning an inclusive class-room, such as class size, curriculum and planning time, training, and other incentives. In light of PEI’s continued transition in Special Education services, such results provided insight into specific recommendations. The identified teach-er supports necessitate acknowledgement and understanding by teachers, parents, school boards, government, and teacher-training programs to ensure inclusive practices are implemented effectively in the PEI school system.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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