MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015393833 · doi:10.1177/0033688208092186

`Here's the Book, Go Teach the Class'

2008· article· en· W2015393833 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas S. C. Farrell

Bibliographic record

VenueRELC Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPracticumLanguage teacherClass (philosophy)PerceptionPedagogyMathematics educationLanguage educationEnglish languagePsychologyTeacher educationTeaching methodComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The English language teaching (ELT) practicum has come to be recognized as one of the most important aspects of a learner teacher's education during their language teacher training program. During the practicum, learner English language teachers need lots of support and cooperating teachers are seen as the main source of this support because they are one of the most influential people in a learner teacher's time during teaching practice. However, within English language teaching (ELT) there is a paucity of research that specifically examines the perceptions and experiences of learner English language teachers concerning the role of support they expect, need and obtain during their practicum experiences. This paper presents one such study that explores the perceptions of 60 learner English language teachers' experiences in Singapore during the period of their school placement for teaching practice. The paper also outlines a detailed case study of eight of these teachers with respect to specific problems they experienced during their teaching practice.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1280.052

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations116
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRELC JournalSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207