The Roles of Teachers in Implementing Educational Innovation: The Case of Implementing Cooperative Learning in Vietnam
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
Since the late 1990s there has been a top-down movement to reform teaching and learning approaches in Vietnam. An important component of this reform is to change the traditional teaching and learning approach into cooperative learning. However, cooperative learning has failed to make its impact on the current teaching and learning approach. This paper examines one of the most important constraints on the implementation of cooperative learning in Vietnam, namely, perceptions of Vietnamese teachers toward the roles and responsibilities of teachers in class. It argues that many principles of cooperative learning are in serious conflict with traditional perceptions of Vietnamese teachers regarding the nature of teaching and learning. Therefore, policymakers and educators need to take cautious steps when implementing such radical approaches in Vietnamese educational settings. If they want to obtain support from teachers, they cannot merely borrow the original version of the innovation. Rather, they need to take various modifications into consideration.
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 | 0.029 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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