Academic Performance of College Students With and Without Disabilities: An Archival Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The academic outcomes of students with (n = 653) and without disabilities (n = 41,357) were compared over a 12-year period at a large Quebec college. Results showed that students with and without disabilities, including learning disabilities, had virtually iden-tical grades and graduation outcomes. However, students with disabilities undertook lighter course loads and took approximately one semester longer to graduate. The find-ings suggest that counsellors need to urge students with disabilities to consider higher education when developing their career plans. In planning the transition, students need to be made aware of disability-related services at post-secondary institutions. Les résultats scolaires d’étudiants d’un grand collège québécois, avec (n = 653) et sans (n = 41 357) déficience, ont été comparés en utilisant des données s’étendant sur 12 années. Les étudiants ayant des déficiences, y compris des troubles d’apprentissage, et les étudiants sans déficience ont obtenu des résultats et des taux de diplômation sensi-blement identiques. Les étudiants avec déficience avaient un horaire de cours moins chargé et prenaient environ un semestre de plus pour obtenir leur diplôme. Les résul-tats donnent à penser que les conseillers pédagogiques devraient encourager les étu-
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".