You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Improving Learning Outcomes: The iPad and Preschool Children with Disabilities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00660 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda Chmiliar |
| Abstract |
The digital age has reached early childhood, and the use of touch screens by young children is common place. Research on the use of touch screen tablets with young children is becoming more prevalent; however, less information is available on the use of touch screen tablets to support young children with disabilities. Touch screen tablets may offer possibilities to preschool children with disabilities to participate in learning in a digital way. The iPad provides easy interaction on the touch screen and access to a multitude of engaging early learning applications. This paper summarizes a pilot study with 8 young children with disabilities included in a preschool classroom, who were given iPads to use in class and at home for a period of 21 weeks. Systematic observations, classroom assessments, and teacher and parent interviews documented the improvements in learning outcomes for each child in many areas including, but not limited to: shape and color recognition, letter recognition, and tracing letters throughout six research cycles. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 92 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 29 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 16 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 12% |
| Unknown | 36 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,386,485
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#2,801
of 30,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,199
of 310,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#91
of 578 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,112 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,681 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 578 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.