MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004878709 · doi:10.1177/0022487102053001002

Professors and the Practicum

2002· article· en· W2004878709 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

VenueJournal of Teacher Education · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPracticumGeneral partnershipHigher educationMedical educationPedagogyTeacher educationPsychologyUniversity facultyPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preservice practicum supervision is often carried out by special supervisory staff rather than by tenured or tenure-track education faculty. Some researchers feel this creates an unfortunate separation between the campus program and the practicum and results in lost opportunities to strengthen the school-university partnership. Five years ago, in an elementary preservice cohort program, the authors adopted a policy of heavy involvement in practicum supervision by all members of their faculty team; the authors also devised ways of supporting the faculty in their supervision. Over the past 4 years, the authors studied the effects of applying this model; it was found to strengthen the school-university partnership, enhance both the practicum and the campus program, and help faculty grow in knowledge and understanding of schooling. However, the approach was time-consuming and presented some other challenges for faculty. If it is to be adopted widely in preservice education, stronger institutional support is needed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.382 · 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