Working Together: Communication Between Stakeholders During the Transition from Early Intervention to School for Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing
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
The transition to school can be a complicated process for families of children with exceptionalities (Janus, Lefort, Cameron, & Kopechanski, 2007). Little is known about the transition to school specifically for children who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH). The aim of this study was to examine the communication that occurred among early intervention (EI) providers, parents, and teachers before and during the child’s first year of kindergarten. Thematic analysis was used to analyze six sets of parent interviews, pre- and post-transition, three interviews with EI providers, and three interviews with teachers of the deaf. Participants from each group described factors that facilitated or hindered the transition to school for D/HH children. Findings were interpreted through the framework of ecological systems theory, which indicate that high-intensity transition support and fluid communication facilitated the transition and fostered positive relationships among those involved in the child’s transition to school.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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