MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1508354913

A Decade of Evolution in the Practice Teaching Component Of a Canadian Teacher Education Program: What Drove Change, What Insights Were Gleaned, And What Challenges Lie Ahead

2014· article· en· W1508354913 on OpenAlexaffabout
Fiona Benson, Kate Hooton

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Education Review (Mercy College, New York) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComponent (thermodynamics)Mathematics educationSociologyPedagogyTeacher preparationTeacher educationPolitical scienceEconomic growthPsychologyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the many and diverse factors that have driven changes to the field-based component of a program of teacher education in a large Canadian university over the past 10 years. We look at key contexts of influence to any work in program change; that of internal and external bodies at the institutional level, the operational or program delivery level, feedback from stakeholders in teacher education, and lastly, the research and scholarship in teacher education that provides a framework for innovation and improvement. A significant inclusion in this paper is the perspective on the support at ground level that is required, but rarely acknowledged, to move any change initiatives forward. We present models that capture a decade of change to 4 undergraduate field experiences and 2 graduate level internships that comprise the field component of our teacher education program. We share key indicators of success resulting from these changes, highlight important insights gleaned, and point to pressing challenges that we face as we look to future program evolution that will carry us into the next decade. While this work reflects one single field-based component of a teacher education program in Canada, we trust that useful parallels can be drawn by the reader as they contemplate or are in the process of addressing and moving through similar orbits of change and evolution within their own programs.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0110.009
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Education Review (Mercy College, New York)Same topicCollaborative Teaching and InclusionFrench-language works237,207