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
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".