Understandings, Beliefs, and Reported Decision Making of First-Year Teachers from Different Reading Teacher Preparation Programs
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In this study we followed 101 preservice teachers through their first year of teaching in order to explore differences in the understandings, beliefs, and decision making of beginning teachers from 3 types of reading teacher preparation programs. 73 of the elementary teachers graduated from programs at 1 of 8 colleges or universities identified by the International Reading Association's National Commission on Excellence in Elementary Teacher Preparation for Reading Instruction as excellent in undergraduate reading teacher preparation. 3 of these recognized programs were reading specialization programs (i.e., a major or minor in reading) housed at universities that also offered a general education program; the remaining 5 featured concentrated experiences and courses in reading that all undergraduates enjoyed. The reported experiences of these 40 reading specialization program teachers and 33 graduates of reading embedded programs were compared with the experiences of 28 graduates from general education programs from the 3 sites that offered a general program. Structured telephone interviews were conducted at 3 points in the beginning teachers' first year of teaching (September, January, June). Inductive data-driven analyses yielded 3 themes-instructional decision making, negotiations, and community-that distinguished the responses of graduates of the IRA recognized programs from those of graduates of general education programs. Graduates of recognized programs tended to speak in clear and thoughtful ways about their instruction, focus on assessing and meeting students' needs, and were more likely to report seeking ongoing support for and development of their own learning. These findings were robust for graduates across the 3 reading specialization sites as well as the 5 other recognized programs, suggesting that the overall quality and features of a program rather than its type or label can make a difference in preservice teacher learning.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle