MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1488821533 · doi:10.21432/t2np49

Using Tablet Computers with Elementary School Students with Special Needs: The Practices and Perceptions of Special Education Teachers and Teacher Assistants / Utilisation des tablettes électroniques avec des enfants d’école primaire à besoins spéciaux

2013· article· en· W1488821533 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPedagogySpecial educationProfessional developmentMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twelve special education teachers and teacher assistants who have instructional experience using iPads with children with special needs completed a survey that queried their practices and perceptions. In general, teachers and assistants were extremely positive about the value of iPads for children with special needs, particularly for children with autism, attention deficits and limitations of fine motor control. Special education teachers and teacher assistants reported most frequently using iPads to promote student language and literacy skills, although mathematics learning activities were also commonly reported. Enhanced student motivation was the most frequently reported benefit of using tablet computers in school followed by instructional planning advantages. Tablet computers appear to have the potential to be an essential aspect of individual program plans. Teaching tasks might reasonably include downloading and organizing specific applications on specific children’s tablets and professional development might increasingly focus of evaluation of tablet applications. Douze professeurs en éducation spéciale et aides-enseignants utilisant les iPads dans leur enseignement avec des enfants à besoins spéciaux ont rempli un questionnaire relatif à leurs pratiques et à leurs perceptions. En général, les enseignants et les aides-enseignants se sont révélés extrêmement positifs quant à la valeur des iPads pour les enfants à besoins spéciaux, en particulier pour les enfants avec autisme, avec un déficit d’attention et avec un contrôle limité de la motricité fine. Le plus souvent, les enseignants en éducation spéciale et les aides-enseignants ont indiqué avoir utilisé les iPads pour améliorer les compétences linguistiques et de littératie des élèves, bien que des activités d'apprentissage des mathématiques aient aussi été mentionnées fréquemment. Le renforcement de la motivation des élèves constituait l'avantage le plus souvent associé à l’utilisation des tablettes à l'école, suivi par des avantages liés à la planification de l’enseignement. Les tablettes pourraient devenir un élément essentiel des plans de programme individuel. Les tâches d'enseignement pourraient inclure le téléchargement et l'organisation d’applications spécifiques sur les tablettes particulières des enfants, et le perfectionnement professionnel pourrait de plus en plus être consacré à l'évaluation des applications pour tablettes.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.278 · 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