Evaluating Web-Based Teacher Development Projects: Models, Methods, and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on evaluations of three Web-based projects aimed at developing various aspects of teachers’ professional competences. The first examines the use of a software tool to facilitate the creation of knowledge-building communities among preservice candidates, host teachers, and high school students. The second was an evaluation of two sites that participated in Canada’s SchoolNet GrassRoots program. A pilot video-on-demand service to high school teachers was the third project we evaluated. From an analysis of these three evaluation projects, we describe and discuss (a) project outcomes that promoted teacher knowledge-building, (b) contextual factors that influenced the success of Web-based professional development activities, and (c) methodological issues that emerged from the studies. Cet article met l’accent sur les evaluations de trois projets de developpement de divers aspects de la competences professionnelles des professeurs et utilisant principalement l’Internet. Le premier examine l’utilisation d’un logiciel-outil pour faciliter la creation de communautes de construction de connaissances chez des etudiants en formation des maitres, des professeurs invites et des etudiants de niveau secondaire. Le second est une evaluation de deux sites qui ont fait partie du programme canadien SchoolNet GrassRoots. Un service pilote de video sur demande pour les enseignants du niveau secondaire etait le troisieme projet que nous avons evalue. A partir de l’analyse de ces trois projets d’evaluation, nous decrivons et discutons (a) les resultats et les facteurs qui ont promu la construction de connaissances chez les enseignants, (b) les facteurs contextuels qui influent sur le succes d’activites de developpement professionnel utilisant principalement l’Internet, et (c) les questions methodologiques qui ont emergees de ces etudes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".