Graduation Prospects of College Students with Specific Learning Disorder and Students with Mental Health Related Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study’s goal was to compare aspects related to academic persistence of two groups of college students with non-visible disabilities: 110 Canadian two and four-year college students - 55 with mental health related disabilities and 55 with Specific Learning Disorder (LD). Results show that students with mental health related disabilities were less likely to intend to graduate than students with LD. Students with mental health disabilities were also older, more likely to be female, to have worse personal circumstances and to feel more socially isolated on campus. They were also less likely to be enrolled in their first choice program or to be registered for campus disability related services than students with LD. Different variables predicted intention to graduate for the two groups. This is a key finding in helping students in these two groups successfully graduate, as they may have different academic, social, personal and accommodation needs. Recommendations are made about how to intervene to improve the academic persistence of students with mental health related disabilities. These include minimizing the fear of stigmatization and adopting a model where accommodations are based on students’ unique needs rather than their diagnoses.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".