MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1743240973

Preparing NESTs and NNESTs for Team Teaching at the Pre-Service Level

2012· article· en· W1743240973 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Service (business)PsychologyTeam teachingElement (criminal law)Mathematics educationPedagogyTeaching methodComputer sciencePolitical scienceBusinessMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teacher collaboration is a key feature of effective professional development and is a necessary element for improved student achievement. This study investigated pre-service non-native English teachers (NNESTs)’ attitudes toward and concerns about team teaching with native English speaking teachers (NESTs). The results reveal that the participants show a great interest and willingness to team teach with NESTs, and believe that this collaborative model has pedagogic benefits. However, they are concerned about being ‘marginalized’ by NESTs and potential communication problems with NESTs. The results show that there is an urgent need to prepare both pre-service NESTs and NNESTs for team teaching. Key words : NESTs, NNESTs; Team teaching; Preservice teacher education

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.578
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.360 · 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