MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Potentials of Digital Assistive Technology and Special Education in Kenya

2017· book-chapter· en· W2592653501 on OpenAlexaff
Foad Hamidi, Patrick Mbullo Owuor, Michaela Hynie, Melanie Baljko, Susan McGrath

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in electronic government, digital divide, and regional development book series · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipAssistive technologyParticipatory designContext (archaeology)Citizen journalismParticipatory action researchPublic relationsEconomic growthPolitical scienceKnowledge managementSociologyEngineeringGeographyComputer scienceOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology specifically designed for people with disabilities is important in lowering boundaries to education, employment and basic life needs. However, the growth of a vibrant tech sector in Kenya has had little effect on the prevalence of digital assistive technology in the country. In this chapter, the authors report on initial explorations undertaken in Kisumu, Kenya to identify existing strengths, relationships, and gaps in access to digital assistive technology. The goal was to explore opportunities for initiatives in participatory design of assistive technology, using an international community/academic partnership. Relevant literature and projects from the areas of Information and Computer Technology for Development (ICT4D), Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) and Critical Disability Studies are reviewed and, these theories are grounded in the authors' experience working with stakeholders in the region. The conclusion discusses promising future directions for participatory and collaborative research in Kenya, and more broadly in the East African context.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.304 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in electronic government, digital divide, and regional development book seriesSame topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207