The Pygmalion principle: The practicum expectations and experiences of mature aged student teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was part of a larger on-going study that is examining the Pygmalion Principle for the practicum experiences of six mature-age student-teachers. The participants are former graduates with university degrees and aged from 36 to 49. They have extensive career backgrounds unrelated to classroom teaching. For this part of the larger study, the mature-age student-teachers were individually interviewed using an open-ended, semi-structured questionnaire. The interviews were approximately 90 minutes in length and were recorded and transcribed at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OSIE) at the University of Toronto. The research data collected via the open-ended interviews echoed the lived experiences of the participants and were in conformity to the method of phenomenology. The study supports the Pygmalion principle of expectations influencing behaviour as perceived by the mature age student-teachers. The findings indicate that the Pygmalion Principle provides a plausible explanation for the resistance to classroom culture, a survival approach to teaching, and the defensive behaviours exhibited by the mature-age, second-career teachers during their 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".