MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Guide to Assistive Technology for Teachers in Special Education

2011· book-chapter· en· W4242278266 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Accessibility for Disabilities
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssistive technologyTask (project management)The InternetSpecial educationMultimediaComputer scienceFocus (optics)Human–computer interactionPsychologyMathematics educationEngineeringWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Everyone has the right to learn and to succeed in education. For people with certain disabilities, learning can be a challenging task, and proper use of certain assistive technologies can significantly ease the challenge, and help the learners to succeed. For teachers in special education, knowing existing assistive technology is an important step towards the proper use of those technologies and success in special education. This chapter provides a guide for teachers about assistive technology and its uses in special education. Assistive technology for people with learning difficulties, assistive technology for the visually impaired, and assistive technology for people with hearing difficulties will be discussed. Since online learning and the Internet are becoming trends in distance education, this chapter will focus on assistive technologies for Web-based distance learning, including assistive technologies for better human-computer interaction. Selecting more appropriate assistive technology for a given learner with a certain learning disability, among many choices, will be discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.304 · 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