MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2213483879 · doi:10.5206/eei.v25i3.7730

The Effects of Home-Based Literacy Activities on the Communication of Students with Severe Speech and Motor Impairments

2015· article· en· W2213483879 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amy Swartz Cox, Denise Clark, Stacey N. Skoning, Theresa Wegner, Florence C. Muwana

Bibliographic record

VenueExceptionality Education International · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmentative and alternative communicationPsychologyReading (process)Intervention (counseling)Multiple baseline designLiteracyAugmentativeDevelopmental psychologyPedagogyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the effects of using sensory, augmentative, and alternative communication (AAC), and supportive communication strategies on the rate and type of communication used by three students with severe speech and motor impairments (SSMI). Using a multiple baseline across behaviour design with sensory and AAC intervention phases, students were paired with a family member during shared reading activities using familiar and unfamiliar storybooks in their homes. All reading activities were video-recorded for analysis. Examination of recorded readings revealed that students demonstrated increases in their overall rates of communication. Further, these students successfully integrated communication devices into the reading process. The results suggest that students with severe disabilities can benefit from these forms of literacy strategies to increase their participation in reading tasks. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

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)0.001
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.399 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExceptionality Education InternationalSame topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207