Primary school teachers’ opinions and attitudes towards stuttering in two South African urban education districts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As teachers form an important part of the intervention process with childrenwho stutter in primary school, the primary aim was to describe primary school teachers'attitudes in South Africa. The secondary aim was to compare teachers' attitudes towardsstuttering in South Africa with those from a pooled group of respondents in the Public OpinionSurvey of Human Attributes-Stuttering (POSHA-S) database from different countries collectedin 2009-2014. METHOD: A quantitative, cross-sectional survey research design was used. Primary schools intwo education districts in Western Cape, South Africa, were sampled. The POSHA-S, a selfadministeredquestionnaire, was completed by a cluster sample of 469 participants. RESULTS: Overall positive attitudes towards stuttering were found, specifically related to thepotential of people who stutter, although the result should be interpreted with caution as thesample was not homogenously positive. Teachers still had misconceptions about personalitystereotypes and the cause of stuttering. The attitudes of the South African sample were slightlymore positive compared with the samples in the current POSHA-S database. CONCLUSION: When developing stuttering intervention strategies, there are a number of keyconsiderations to take into account. The study provides a basis for speech-language therapiststo think about intervention with teachers and which areas of stuttering to consider.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".