MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916403622 · doi:10.1177/0162643419841550

Understanding Teacher Perceptions of Assistive Technology

2019· article· en· W2916403622 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Special Education Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian Studies
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionCertificationThematic analysisAssistive technologyLiteracyConsistency (knowledge bases)Professional developmentMedical educationComputer literacyTeacher educationMathematics educationApplied psychologyPedagogyComputer scienceQualitative researchMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examined Grade 6–10 Ontario Certified Teachers’ ( n = 24) perceptions of assistive technology (AT) and the factors correlated with perceived usefulness of AT. A mixed methods design that included a survey consisting of open- and closed-ended items elicited information about teachers’ AT knowledge and training, their basic computer literacy, their perception of administrative support for access to and implementation of AT, the usefulness of AT, and the factors that encourage or discourage AT use in the classroom. Results of correlational analysis suggested that computer literacy and AT knowledge were significantly positively correlated with perceived usefulness of AT, and a thematic analysis further identified that training and student factors may influence AT use. Implications for preservice and professional development teacher training are discussed, given the consistency of teacher-reported need for greater training opportunities for both students and teachers.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.344 · 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