Information and Communication Technology Profiles of College Students with Learning Disabilities and Adequate and Very Poor Readers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We interviewed 58 experts (30 in French, 28 in English) about potentially useful information and communicationtechnologies (ICTs) for Québec college students with a learning disability (LD) and evaluated whether collegestudents with an LD (n = 74), in fact, used these. We also compared ICT use, learning opportunities, andattitudes among three groups of students from Montreal area French and English language colleges: (1) studentswith an LD, and (2) students who, based on a reading comprehension test, were categorized as adequate readers(approximately top 50%) or (3) very poor readers (approximately bottom 20%). Results indicate importantdiscrepancies between the views of the experts and the realities of students with LDs. Moreover, students with anLD use significantly fewer different types of ICTs than those without an LD.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it