MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W114942499 · doi:10.5206/eei.v20i2.7662

Promoting Leadership in the Ongoing Professional Development of Teachers: Responding to Globalization and Inclusion

2010· article· en· W114942499 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Philpott, Edith Furey, Sharon Penney

Bibliographic record

VenueExceptionality Education International · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaceProfessional developmentInclusion (mineral)Context (archaeology)PedagogyEthnic groupDiversity (politics)Faculty developmentMainstreamingPolitical sciencePublic relationsMulticulturalismCultural pluralismSociologyPsychologySpecial educationSocial scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the need for innovative leadership in teacher education in the Canadian context, with a particular call for renewed professional development of current teachers. Within a country defined as multicultural, recent demographic shifts, interregional migration, growing ethnic diversity, and the emergence of a paradigm of inclusion, contemporary classrooms are evolving at a pace faster than projected. While inclusive education emerged from the growth of services for children with disabilities, it is now a concept much broader than initially con-ceived. Expanded concepts of learner differences are necessitating an urgent need for leadership in redeveloping effective training for current teachers. This paper argues that ongoing professional development must be characterized by six focus areas in order to empower teachers with pragmatic skills to balance the needs of their diverse classes. The authors conclude that a first step in this process is training for administrators who lead professional development in schools.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.019
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.013
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExceptionality Education InternationalSame topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207