An exploration of teacher's use of iPads for students with learning support needs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project explored how iPads were being used in a range of K‐12 schools to support the learning of students with a range of learning support needs. Groups of teachers (and other professionals) from the USA , Canada, Australia and the UK were invited to complete an online survey focused on the use of iPads in their classrooms, perspectives of their skill level, and how their school and school districts support the use of iPads. The survey focused on iPad use in classrooms (curriculum and skills); teachers’ skill levels; whether iPads are addressed in the Individualised Education Program ( IEP ); the systemic support for the iPads; and the perceived benefits and barriers. The results reveal that respondents are using iPads across many areas of the curriculum, which affirms the research in the emerging literature base. However, there are teacher reported differences in the manner and scope of iPad use in the classrooms and also the integration of the iPad in the IEP . The research also highlights variability in reported skill level for the iPad and an increased need for enhanced systemic support, such as training, funding, technical support and administrative support for the use of the iPad as a pedagogical tool.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it