Enhancing Teacher Learning for Student Development: The Case of Collaborative Leadership Skills
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This research aimed to investigate by utilizing the Research and Development (R&D) methodology, to yield innovative educational outcomes. The focus was on efficiently deriving educational innovations from experimental research that had been conducted in field settings. The intended applicability of the research findings was directed towards benefiting schools that serve as the target population, and thereby, facilitating the widespread dissemination of the research outcomes. This educational innovation took the form of an online self-training program, which was comprised of two distinct projects. Firstly, there was the Teacher Development Project, which encompassed seven modules designed for the professional growth and learning of educators. Secondly, the Teacher-Led Learning Enhancement Project consisted of modules that were intended to be practically applied by teachers in facilitating the translation of the acquired knowledge into student development, with a single module dedicated to this aspect. The experimental research results from the first project revealed that those teachers belonging to the experimental group (consisting of 13 individuals) had attained post-test scores by the 90/90 standard. Furthermore, the scores exhibited statistical significance, given that these scores had been higher than the scores obtained from the pre-test. In addition, the experimental research findings from the second project revealed that the target group of students, who benefited from the developmental intervention (210 individuals), had exhibited post-test scores that had been significantly higher than their respective pre-test scores. This factor demonstrated that the utilization of the Research and Development (R&D) methodology in this study had resulted in the development of an educational innovation termed "Online Self-Training Program to Enhance Teacher Learning for Student Development: The Case of Collaborative Leadership Skills." The effectiveness of this innovation aligned with the research hypotheses, and thereby demonstrated that the program could be beneficially applied to teachers and students in those schools that serve as the target population. Consequently, the research outcomes can be disseminated for future use and implementation.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,011 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».