How Are Schools Doing? Parental Perceptions of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders, Down Syndrome and Learning Disabilities: A Comparative Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parents of 209 children (162 males and 46 females) with autism spectrum disorders, Down syndrome or learning disabilities ranging in age from 4 to 21 years were surveyed about their perceptions of the education of their children. Items on the survey were categorized into 7 areas: school personnel's knowledge about the disability, best practices, behavioural concerns, parent/school collaboration, education team, individual education plan, and miscellaneous other items. Group differences were observed on a number of items and in almost every case parents in the learning disabilities group rated the items significantly lower than one or more of the other groups. In addition, numerous items were paired such that parents were asked to rate if a certain educational “best practice” was being utilized with their child and if they felt their child required it. Examination of the paired items indicated many significant differences between what parents felt was being offered their child, and what their child needed to achieve their maximum potential across diagnostic groups. The implications of these and other results are discussed.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".