MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1612233442 · doi:10.14742/ajet.922

Are secondary preservice teachers well prepared to teach with technology? A case study from China

2011· article· en· W1612233442 on OpenAlexaff
George Zhou, Zuochen Zhang, Yueke Li

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Journal of Educational Technology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTechnology integrationChinaTeacher educationEducational technologyMathematics educationPsychologyPedagogyMedical educationTeacher preparationHigher educationMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<span>This case study investigates how well secondary preservice teachers are prepared to use technology in teaching in China. The study focuses on a teacher education program that is a representative of many of those in mid-sized Chinese universities. It examines participants' experiences with, perspectives of, and expectations about the use of technology and the training they are receiving in this area. Data collected through survey and interviews indicate that research participants have similar perspectives regarding the use of technology in teaching and the integration of technology in teacher education as their counterparts elsewhere. They reported an overall low level of ability to use technology and shared some concerns with the technology training they received from the teacher education program.</span>

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations43
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralasian Journal of Educational TechnologySame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207