Do Predictors of Children’s Special Educational Needs in Grade 3 Differ by Special Needs Status in Kindergarten in Ontario, Canada?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionChildren with special educational needs (SEN) often struggle academically. Previous studies found that children’s abilities in kindergarten are predictive of their future SEN status. It is currently unknown whether these predictors differ in children with and without an early identification of a special need in kindergarten (SN-K). Objectives and ApproachWe investigated early predictors of SEN in Grade 3, in a cohort of Ontario children, with and without SN-K (1,824 and 62,842, respectively), who attended kindergarten between 2003/04 and 2005/06. Early Development Instrument data, a teacher-completed checklist of children’s development, were linked to Grade 3 standardized reading, writing, and mathematics test scores. Controlling for children’s demographics, multivariate binary logistic regressions were conducted examining the association between children’s developmental outcomes, their functional impairments, the necessity for further assessment (all reported by their kindergarten teacher) and their SEN status in Grade 3. ResultsOverall, 69.8% of children with SN-K had SEN in Grade 3, while 11.6% of children without SN-K had SEN. Our analyses revealed that, for children with SN-K, having a functional impairment was the most significant predictor of having SEN in Grade 3 (Odds Ratio=3.61, 2.59-5.02 95% confidence interval). For children without SN-K, teachers reporting the need for further assessment was the strongest predictor of having SEN in Grade 3 in children without SN-K (Odds Ratio=2.70, 2.49-2.93). Conclusion / ImplicationsEarly predictors of SEN in Grade 3 differ for children who receive an early identification (SN-K) compared to those who don’t. How children with SN-K function in a classroom is the best predictor of SEN in Grade 3, while teachers’ observation that a child needs further assessment is the strongest predictor of SEN in Grade 3 for those without SN-K. Addressing these areas early on may help reduce the number of children with SEN in later grades and may positively impact their future academic success.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".