“Digging a Hole With a Fork”: Investigating Reading Difficulty in Manitoba: An Exploratory Case Study of Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the daily life and school experiences of adults in Manitoba can inform important structural and systemic priorities to better meet the needs of those with reading disabilities (RD). The research questions for this study were (a) how have adults with severe RD experienced school in Manitoba and (b) how has RD had an impact on their life experiences? Following a constructivist stance, this study employed a case study approach in which 11 Manitoba adults who self-identified or were diagnosed with RD participated in one-on-one semi-structured interviews. They expressed feelings of pain and the impact of unmet needs, as well as joy when feeling understood and embraced. The results suggest that a diagnosis of RD, especially earlier on, created a more defined self-image and acceptance of RD. Further, when the system of support provided tools, accommodations, and understanding, participants felt encouraged and optimistic. Schools were found to have an emotional impact and therefore have an important role to play. Some participants reported that diagnosis and advocacy were due to happenstance encounters or family influence. Community supports were found to be largely absent. Although those who were in post-secondary study typically found accommodations, only one participant reported utilizing a public disabilities organization for advocacy in the workplace or school. Individuals who moved towards self-actualization appeared to embrace diversity and challenges while at the same time developing strong compensation skills to work through problems caused by RD. Further, individuals who persistently worked towards personal goals had come to a more peaceful reconciliation of their struggles. A conceptual model was developed that identified the essential interaction of self-identity, community, and personal traits. Given the complexity and variety of experiences, community and school systems meant to support those with RD must coordinate efforts by learning more about RD and listening to their voices.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".