Speaking Up and Speaking Freely: Beginning Teachers' Critical Perceptions of Their Professional Induction.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The induction of beginning teachers has assumed a burgeoning priority given existing North American preoccupations with teacher retention, state educational standards, and large-scale assessment. In Canada, and especially Ontario, school boards are following the lead of many American institutions in establishing key partnerships with university faculties of education and provincial governing bodies to best prepare and induct beginning teachers into the profession. The objective of this qualitative research study was to examine the perceptions of 173 beginning teachers in Ontario participating in purposely selected exemplary induction programs. Four core categories emerged that showed conceptual differences in how teacher cohorts over a 2-year period understood their induction; namely, induction as exceeding beginning teachers ’ expectations, their appreciation of meaningful support, their recognition of teacher leadership, and the disconnect between in-services and practice. This study draws attention to the professional enculturation of beginning teachers, but more notably, compels a practical reconsideration of how induction is defined in light of beginning teacher growth and sustainability.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".