MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072234026 · doi:10.1080/08878730709555404

Can cooperating teachers help student teachers develop a vision of education?

2007· article· en· W2072234026 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

VenueThe Teacher Educator · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Professional Development and Motivation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisionTeacher educationPsychologyPedagogyStudent teacherProfessional developmentMathematics educationIndependence (probability theory)Reflection (computer programming)Sociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Research in teacher education is increasingly concerned with teachers' visions of education and their sense of calling, mission, and professional identity. Interviews with outstanding cooperating teachers focused on exploring their beliefs on teacher vision, and what makes a good teacher. The teachers were also asked to discuss their beliefs on whether vision—and the independence of spirit that a strong vision is thought to foster—is relevant in their work with student teachers. The teachers revealed a strong sense of why they teach and shared goals around several themes. They also maintained that reflection is key to developing a vision of education. Teacher education programs can support these teachers' views of quality education by developing conceptual frameworks that foster reflection and the development of a vision for education, particularly in the student teaching experience.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.362 · 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