MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021091130 · doi:10.1080/00094056.2015.1018772

What Is Teaching? Inside the Black Box of What Teachers Do

2015· article· en· W2021091130 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

VenueChildhood Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRubricAccountabilitySet (abstract data type)Context (archaeology)Perspective (graphical)PedagogyMathematics educationStudent achievementStudent engagementTeaching methodPsychologyQuality (philosophy)Academic achievementPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article emphasizes the importance of taking a broad approach to understanding the act of teaching, especially in the context of teacher evaluation. It attempts to shift the commonly held notion of teaching as a one-directional act of instruction provided by teachers with the aim to inform, help, and advise learners in their efforts to attain pre-set curricular goals. The wider stance takes into consideration teacher-student relationships and various overt and subtle acts of differentiation and scaffolding that the teacher carries out to facilitate effective student learning and enhance student motivation and engagement. Such a wider perspective is especially relevant in developing rubrics for assessing instruction quality in an environment largely dominated by discourses on assessment and accountability in education—both in teaching and learning.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.304 · 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