Pratiques et Perceptions des Psychologues Scolaires Face à l’Évaluation des Élèves en Difficulté d’Apprentissage au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the assessment practices of Quebec school psychologists in the evaluation of elementary school students referred for suspected learning disabilities as well as their perceptions of these practices. The purpose of this study is to identify the ratio of learning disabled students within the school psychologist’s clientele, the time spent assessing these students, the learning disabilities definition used by psychologists, the most frequently used assessment tools, and the psychologist’s role in the diagnosis of learning disabilities. Seventy-six school psychologists participate in this research. The majority of participants estimates that learning-disabled students represent more than 50% of their clientele. Seventy-two percent of the time they devote to these students is spent doing assessments. Results show that all participants use the Wechsler Scales. However, their assessment practices vary greatly, as they use a variety of other tests. They deplore the lack of consensus over assessment and identification procedures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".