Meeting the challenge of deaf and hard of hearing students transitioning to secondary school : parent and student perspectives / by Lisa Tropea.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this qualitative study was to investigate the perspectives of parents of deaf and hard of hearing students who were ready to make the transition from elementary school to secondary school or who had recently done so. In addition, the objective was to converse with the deaf and hard of hearing students themselves and the parents in order to determine what the parents and children believed to be the benefits and potential barriers of the children's educational placements. \nQualitative research methods were used, including the use of an interview guide (Patton, 2002) and field notes. Data was collected using two separate focus groups, one group of three parents and one group of six students in grades nine or ten. All of the participants were oral deaf (hearing impaired students who could communicate orally) or hard of hearing students who \nattend the same school and who have all recently made the transition to secondary school. Both groups of participants reflected upon their past and present experiences regarding class placement, transition and learning in an inclusive environment. Data collection took place in a large urban centre in Northwestern Ontario. Throughout the research process, data analysis was continuous. Findings disclosed that students with hearing loss and their parents have similar concerns regarding inclusion, class placement and the transition of deaf and hard of hearing students from elementary to secondary 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".