MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094007088 · doi:10.5539/ies.v13n11p44

The Challenges Facing Arab Students with Learning Disabilities in Higher Education Institutions and the Role of Support Centers in Their Academic Functioning: A Preliminary Study

2020· article· en· W3094007088 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dorit Olenik‐Shemesh, Tali Heiman, Alla Assaig

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHigher educationLearning disabilityQualitative researchPedagogyHebrewStudy skillsMedical educationSemi-structured interviewMultimethodologyMathematics educationSociologyDevelopmental psychologySocial sciencePolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The topic of support for students with learning disabilities (LD) has been studied to a considerable extent in recent years, due to the significant increase in the integration of students with learning disabilities in higher education institutions (HEI). However, there is hardly any research examining the support for students with learning disabilities in Israel’s Arab sector. The purpose of the current preliminary study is to examine whether support centers for students with learning disabilities assist Arab students with their learning and general academic functioning in Israeli higher education institutions. The study is qualitative, involving semi-structured interviews with eight Arab students diagnosed with learning disabilities studying at two institutions of higher education. Analysis of the interviews revealed four major themes: The double difficulty that students experience due to the fact that they are Arabs for whom Hebrew is a second language, and due to their learning disabilities; lower awareness of learning disabilities in the Arab sector in Israel; post-diagnosis relief; a sense of wellbeing satisfaction with the educational, social and occupational support provided, enabling them to study and succeed. The article addresses also to the limitations of the study as a primary study, along with recommendations for further research based on this preliminary study.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicDisability Education and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207