MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Implementing Coteaching and Cogenerative Dialoguing in Urban Science Education

2005· article· en· W2066548792 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

VenueSchool Science and Mathematics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationDiversity (politics)PsychologyEthnic groupTeacher educationPedagogyHigher educationFaculty developmentTeaching methodProfessional developmentSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past 7 years the authors have been involved in the development of a new model for the education of science teachers that has the potential to address teacher education in challenging urban settings characterized by problems such as teacher turnover and retention, low job satisfaction, and contradictions arising from cultural and ethnic diversity. An intensive research program accompanied the development effort; the research results were used as resources in redesigning the evolving model to make it more appropriate for the situations at hand. The science teacher education program at an urban university was built around a yearlong field experience, during which all prospective teachers learned to teach in an urban high school while coteaching, that is, while teaching at the elbow of a mentor teacher or one or more peers. Over this period, a number of different configurations of coteaching and the associated cogenerative dialoguing were tried, tested, and investigated. The paper describes the historical development of the different configurations of the model and the emergent contradictions that led the researchers to enact changes to their approach. The central idea in the development effort was the creation of an environment that (a) best affords the learning of how to teach in urban high schools, (b) decreases teacher isolation, (c) mitigates turnover and retention, and (d) addresses contradictions arising from the cultural and ethnic diversity of students and teachers. Most importantly, this model of teacher education and enhancement simultaneously multiplies the resources and opportunities to support the learning of students.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.340 · 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