Assessing Special Needs of Students with Hearing Impairment in Jordan and Its Relation to Some Variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main purpose of the present study was to assess special needs for students with hearing impairment. The sample of the study consisted of 231 students enrolled at schools for deaf children in Jordan, 113 males and 118 females. A special needs scale was developed and used in assessing special needs for students. The reliability and validity of the scale were established. The investigator used the t-test and ANOVA to answer the research questions. The results indicated that the differences between all pairs of means for both male and female respondents were statistically non-significant. Also, findings showed that the hearing-impaired students who have 55-69 dB hearing loss were more affected by communication needs, audiological rehabilitation needs, and learning style needs than hearing-impaired students who have 90 dB hearing loss and beyond hearing loss. In addition to, findings revealed that the grade groups of 2-5 and 6-8 were more affected than grade group of 9-11 for the following dependent variables: communication needs, social and emotional needs, personal needs, behavioral needs, and academic needs. Also, the grade group of 6-8 was more affected than the grade groups of 2-5 and 9-11 with respect to the dependent variable of learning style needs. Differences between mean scores of students who used sign language and total communication were in favor of students who used total communication on the dimensions of communication needs, audiological rehabilitation needs, behavioral needs, and learning style needs. The study recommended on meeting the needs of students with hearing impairment throughout planned programs.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".