MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041063121 · doi:10.1177/0741713610392763

The Teaching Perspectives Inventory at 10 Years and 100,000 Respondents

2010· article· en· W2041063121 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

VenueAdult Education Quarterly · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellencePsychologyTeaching methodVocabularyPedagogyMathematics educationReliability (semiconductor)SociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Teaching Perspectives Inventory (TPI) measures teachers’ profiles on five contrasting views of what it means “to teach.” The inventory can be used in aiding self-reflection, developing statements of teaching philosophy, engendering conversations about teaching, and recognizing legitimate variations on excellence in teaching. Available at www.TeachingPerspectives.com , the TPI is a free, self-report, self-scoring inventory that promotes a pluralistic understanding of teaching and equips respondents with a more explicit vocabulary for reflecting on their own teaching and that of others. Ten years of accumulated responses for more than 100,000 respondents in more than 100 countries has provided a rich data bank for analysis of the instrument’s reliability, validity, and utility in promoting conversations about teaching that are respectful of disciplinary and professional signature pedagogies as well as cultural and social variations on how teaching is understood and valued.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.377 · 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