L’intégration des TIC et des aides technologiques par les orthopédagogues oeuvrant auprès des élèves handicapés ou en difficultés d’apprentissage / The integration of ICT and technological support by special-education teachers working with children with a
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'article porte sur l’utilisation des TIC et des aides technologiques par les orthopédagogues oeuvrant auprès d'élèves présentant des handicaps ou des troubles d'apprentissage. Il décrit l'intérêt de ces outils pour ces élèves, puis présente et analyse les résultats d'une enquête menée auprès d'orthopédagogues québécois. Peu d'entre eux rapportent une utilisation régulière des TIC et des aides technologiques par les élèves en classe et la majorité des répondants se sentent plus compétents à utiliser les TIC à des fins personnelles qu'à des fins pédagogiques. L'article discute des moyens pouvant favoriser une utilisation plus soutenue des aides technologiques. This paper studies the use of ICT and technological support by special-education teachers working with children with a handicap or learning disabilities. It describes the interest of such tools for these students before presenting and analyzing the results of a survey done among Quebec special-education teachers. Few report the regular use of ICT and technological support by students in class. The majority of respondents said they felt more competent using ICT for personal reasons than for educational purposes. The paper discusses the means that could facilitate a greater use of technological assistance.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".