MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038706126 · doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.772

Student Teachers’ Self-perception of their Mathematical Skills and their Conceptions about Teaching Mathematics in Primary Schools

2015· article· en· W2038706126 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-Claude Boyer, Nicole Mailloux

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMathematics Education and Teaching Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionMathematics educationCompetence (human resources)DialecticPsychologyContext (archaeology)PedagogySocial psychologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research has shown that more often than not beliefs rather than knowledge are major determinants in pedagogical decisions that teachers make in the classroom (Doudin, Pons, Martin & Lafortune, 2003). Self-perceptions appear to be strongly influenced by students’ relationship with mathematical contents and students’ perceptions about their own ability to master these contents. The importance of self-perceptions, beliefs and pre-conceptions in decision making leads to this question: does student teachers’ self-perception of their mathematical competence influence their conceptions about mathematics teaching? To answer this question we compared the results obtained from two questionnaires administered to student teachers. The first questionnaire focused on conceptions about teaching mathematics while the second focused on self-perceptions in mathematics. This paper analyzes in the context of Boyer's Dialectical reconstruction of knowledge model (Boyer & Mailloux, 2012) the links between student teachers’ conceptions about mathematics education and their perceptions of their own mathematical skills.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia - Social and Behavioral SciencesSame topicMathematics Education and Teaching TechniquesFrench-language works237,207