Perspectives on Laboratory School Practica from Canadian Secondary Mathematics and Science Preservice Teachers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The role of contemporary laboratory schools has become singularly distinct from the private and public education systems, functioning as sites for practica, professional development and educational research without exploring their multiple purposes in tandem. This study examines the factors contributing to Canadian Secondary Math and Science teacher candidates’ practica experiences in a laboratory school setting. The primary data source is from semi-structured interviews to support a case study approach. With assorted degrees of impact, teacher candidates have identified six factors influencing their perceptions of the laboratory school setting before, during, and after their practica. The major findings are as follows: (1) University-School partnership stakeholders assumed partial responsibilities typically reserved for Faculty Advisors and Associate Teachers to offer more sources of support for Teacher Candidates; (2) The Third Space of the laboratory school offered six benefits for Teacher Candidates, including gaining peer mentorship and support across cohorts; (3) Laboratory school cohorts are tightly bonded communities, established by the extended timeframes they spend with each other, and their communities are reinforced and competitive feelings are mitigated through their shared venture in engaging in Action Research a site-based course; (4) Structured and unstructured classroom granted teacher candidates six advantages before they began their practica; (5) Engaging in self-studies in Action Research before practica enabled Teacher Candidates to understand the harmony of teaching and research as teacher-researchers so that during their practica they could leverage from their self-studies to inform them about the nuances of the school communities or critically reflect, and refine their teaching practice; (6) Emerging Scholarly Teaching mindsets were developed and its methodology was alluded to by Teacher Candidates as they unpremeditatedly correlated Action Research or Educational Research with their insights and occurrences about practice teaching in the laboratory school setting. Numerous facets of the Third Space, Apprenticeship, Collaboration and Inquiry, are showcased in the laboratory school practice setting. Teacher inquiry especially has been portrayed, which indicates the need for teacher candidates to continue developing their identities as teacher-researchers within and outside the confines of practica. Recommendations are provided for university-school partnership stakeholders to inform Teacher Education programming.
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 | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,027 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 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 ».