School Experiences of Adolescents With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
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
This article reports on a qualitative study of the school experiences of adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the context of quantitative research on teacher attitudes and practices, adolescent self-appraisals, and social and family relationships. Twelve adolescents with ADHD participated in in-depth, semistructured interviews addressing major aspects of school life. Using a modified grounded theory framework, researchers coded these interviews. Three themes emerged: (a) support for a performance deficit, (b) academic and social engagement, and (c) moving from dependence to independence. What is most striking is the low level of agency students demonstrated; that is, rather than acting with purpose on their environments, they seemed to react to things that happened to them. These findings suggest that teachers of adolescents with ADHD know about the nature of the disorder, understand that students' difficulties with organization and academic performance are not typically intentional, use evidence-based interventions to support students, and provide the monitoring and scaffolding needed for academic achievement. The students also provide specific suggestions for parents and peers regarding the supports they need to be successful.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it