MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989803080 · doi:10.1002/sce.1017

Pedagogical context knowledge: Toward a fuller understanding of what good science teachers know

2001· article· en· W1989803080 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Education · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicScience Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Mathematics educationScience educationKnowledge baseSituatedKnowledge levelSociology of scientific knowledgePedagogyPsychologyComputer scienceSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A codified model of teacher knowledge, situated in school science teaching, is proposed as a synthesis of a number of models, metaphors, and notions already described in the literature about teachers' knowledge. This model, called pedagogical context knowledge , suggests that in discussion of their classroom practice, exemplary science teachers utilize four kinds of knowledge: academic and research knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, professional knowledge, and classroom knowledge. The model is used to examine data collected through interviews with science teachers about the ways in which they design and implement science lessons. Analysis of the data shows that the model is sufficiently robust to provide a simple and rapid, yet effective and efficient way of examining teachers' views and the knowledge base in which they are embedded. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sci Ed 85: 426–453, 2001.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.287
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.201 · 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