MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1523161702 · doi:10.29173/mruer113

Technology and disabilities: Why it can help and hinder learning

2014· article· en· W1523161702 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Holly Elzinga

Bibliographic record

VenueMount Royal Undergraduate Education Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationPsychologyLearning disabilityEducational technologyTechnology educationPedagogyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology is a common occurrence in almost every elementary classroom today. In this research study, I am going to be discussing how technology can have both a positive and negative effect on students who have disabilities. My research methods included conducting an online survey and two interviews with parents and teachers. Through my research, I found that there are many concerns with how technology is used in the classroom, but for the most part it ends in a positive outcome for the students. However, there is always room for improvement when using digital technologies, and my research demonstrates that it takes cooperation between the parents and the teachers for technology to truly be successful for an elementary student. As a teacher candidate, my findings have shown how important technology is to elementary students, and how, when used in an appropriate manner, technology can be an incredible tool for students with disabilities to use.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.277 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMount Royal Undergraduate Education ReviewSame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207