MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159526508 · doi:10.11575/ajer.v57i2.55476

The Effects of a School-Based Program on the Reported Self-Advocacy Knowledge of Students With Learning Disabilities

2011· article· en· W2159526508 on OpenAlexaff
Faye Mishna, Barbara Muskat, Fataneh Farnia, Judith Wiener

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyConscienceHumanitiesLearning disabilityPsychosocialDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A school-based study examined self-reported self-advocacy knowledge of middle school students with learning disabilities (LD). Children with LD are vulnerable to experiencing psychosocial and academic problems. Self-advocacy is a protective factor as students with LD enter middle and high school, comprising knowledge of one’s learning strengths and LD; awareness of one’s rights and responsibilities; awareness of accommodations needed; and ability to communicate one’s learning needs and required accommodations. The students reported increasing their ability to advocate for themselves. Results underscore the importance of adults such as teachers and parents discussing LD and associated issues with children and youth. Une étude en milieu scolaire a examiné les perceptions qu’avaient des élèves à l’école intermédiaire ayant des troubles d’apprentissage par rapport à leur autonomie sociale. Ces élèves sont à risque de souffrir de problèmes psychosociaux et académiques. L’autonomie sociale constitue un facteur de protection quand les élèves ayant des troubles d’apprentissage commencent l’école intermédiaire ou secondaire. Elle implique la connaissance de ses forces académiques et de ses troubles d’apprentissage; la conscience de ses droits et ses responsabilités; la conscience des accommodations nécessaires; et la capacité de faire connaître ses besoins en matière d’apprentissage et d’accommodations. Les élèves ont indiqué qu’ils se sentaient mieux en mesure de se défendre. Les résultats soulignent l’importance pour les adultes comme les enseignants et les parents de discuter de troubles d’apprentissage et d’enjeux qui s’y rattachent avec les enfants et les jeunes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDisability Education and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207