Coteaching: Creating resources for learning and learning to teach chemistry in urban high schools
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract How do new teachers become confident and competent while they are interns in inner‐city neighborhood schools challenged by many problems, often associated with economic shortfalls and cultural differences between the students and their teachers? Many science teacher education programs place a lot of emphasis on the planning stages of curriculum. But considerable discrepancies emerge between planned and lived curriculum, particularly in inner‐city, comprehensive high schools, and especially in classrooms that honor student interests and culture as starting points for learning. Previous research showed that coteaching provides opportunities for learning to teach even though the lived curriculum emerges often in unpredictable ways from the dialectic of collective (teacher and students) agency and structure. The present study allowed us to understand the underlying processes: the presence of a coteacher increases access to social and material resources, and thereby increases opportunities for actions that otherwise would not occur. Greater teaching opportunities provide newcomers with greater opportunities of learning to teach. ? 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 41: 882‐904, 2004.
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 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 | 0.087 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it