Parental Involvement Beliefs, Support for Learning, and Learning Behaviours in Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) during COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted education in Canada, particularly impacting children and parents, with notable challenges for those with special education needs like Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).This study investigates parental involvement and support for children's learning during this period, examining factors such as self-efficacy, role beliefs, time/energy, and knowledge/skills.Data from a nationwide survey (Spring 2021) of 464 parents, including 278 with ADHD-diagnosed children (Mage = 9.88) and 186 with typically developing children (Mage= 9.49), were analyzed.Results indicate that parents of children with ADHD felt a greater responsibility and availability for involvement but exhibited lower self-efficacy and support for their child's learning compared to parents of typically developing children.While parental involvement positively predicted child learning behaviors, higher parental knowledge/skills and stronger role beliefs were associated with reduced learning behaviors in children with ADHD.The unique challenges faced by this population, along with their implications, are 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.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".