From Experience to Expertise: Professional Development through Collaborative Inquiry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research paper presents the outcomes of a professional learning community (PLC) of teachers involved in a personal service approach to professional development. The PLC was conceptualized as an inquiry-based professional development intervention based on teachers’ specific needs. Participants represented 4 regions that encompassed a large Ontario school board district. Through a qualitative grounded theory research approach, two key outcomes emerged from the data, including, ‘Intrinsic motivation to improve teaching and learning’ and ‘Critical reflections in teaching.’ By critically reflecting on their teaching within the PLC model, the teacher-participants guided their own professional development in the context of self-affirming practice. Since the research project was contextualized in the literature, the paper further discusses how this professional development model is ideally suited to meet the needs of teachers and students of the 21st Century. Lastly, it is suggested that this PLC model can be replicated in similar contexts by schools and school boards across the Golden Horseshoe.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.038 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".