MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147002548 · doi:10.1044/aac17.4.126

Supporting the Transition of Elementary School Students Who Use AAC as They Are Promoted From One Grade to the Next

2008· article· en· W2147002548 on OpenAlexaffabout
Susie Blackstien-Adler

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChecklistTransition (genetics)Medical educationPsychologyMathematics educationPedagogyMedicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.353

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.173
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives on Augmentative and Alternative CommunicationSame topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207