MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1520485274 · doi:10.26522/brocked.v21i2.277

Building Community in Triads Involved in Science Teacher Education: An Innovative Professional Development Model

2012· article· en· W1520485274 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Todd Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueBrock Education Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional developmentNegotiationTriad (sociology)Service (business)PedagogyTeacher educationPsychologySociologyMedical educationMedicineBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes a pre-service and in-service science teacher joint professional development pilot project. It is intended to strengthen the community and facilitate professional growth for triad members involved in the professional development of pre-service science teachers. Through a summer workshop and follow-up monthly meetings, this project connected the clinical experiences of the pre-service teachers with the joint professional development of both the pre- and in-service teachers. A mixed-methods research design was used to investigate the impact of this project. Results indicated that this model was successful in aligning with characteristics of effective professional development derived from national standards documents and professional development literature. Additionally, through engaging pre- and in-service teachers in the co-creation of modules, which were subsequently enacted in classrooms, collaborative positioning occurred whereby the pre- and in-service teachers were found more equally sharing and co-negotiating responsibilities in the classroom. This article describes the need for this project and provides an in-depth description of each component of the project enacted, as well as additional findings supportive of its effectiveness.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.219
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrock Education JournalSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207