Re‐envisioning mentorship: pre‐service teachers and associate teachers as co‐learners
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Associate teachers have always been integral to pre‐service teacher education, providing learning experiences to support the development of pedagogical knowledge in various subject areas. However, the requirement by many national and provincial curricula that technology be integrated into teaching practice, calls for a re‐examination of the roles associate teachers play. This paper reports on a study of associate teachers’ perspectives about their roles in supporting pre‐service teachers as they integrate technology during the practicum. An invitation to participate in a set of pre‐ and post‐practicum interviews about supporting pre‐service teachers integrate technology was issued as part of a larger survey sent to 150 associate teachers. Content analysis of pre‐ and post‐interview data from four associate teachers and survey responses revealed that associate teachers’ roles varied across a continuum from mentor to co‐learner in relation to technology integration. These changing roles point to a need to re‐envision traditional notions of mentorship during the practicum.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it