Supporting the Transition of Elementary School Students Who Use AAC as They Are Promoted From One Grade to the Next
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
Abstract One of the challenges in supporting students who use AAC and who have complex learning needs is the transition from one school year to the next. These students are typically supported by large teams, many of whom change from one year to the next. Effective, efficient transfer of knowledge and skill from one team to the next does not always occur, compromising the continuity of programming. This article will outline a 3-year project (spanning two transition periods) that aimed to improve on the transition practices within a school board in Ontario Canada. Data collection focused on beliefs and knowledge about transition, transfer of important strategies and tools, and the actual process undertaken by each school. Following analysis of data collected in five schools during the first transition period, the schools developed and piloted a transition checklist, designed to improve on practice. The transition checklist, which resulted in significant change in practice in all five schools, will be described and is offered by the author upon request.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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