Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report is an extension of a study that examined the final evaluations of 17 cohorts of teacher-candidates (n=374), who completed their 16-week extended-practicum through one Western Canadian university in one of the years from 1986 to 2002. Evaluation results based on nine instructional categories were analyzed according to four factors: (a) grade level taught; (b) school location; (c) year of the internship; and (d) gender of the intern. Descriptive statistics calculated for each of these four factors revealed minor differences in the intern sub-groups’ aggregates of final evaluation ratings. For grade level, interns who taught K-3 were rated slightly higher than those in the other grade levels in six of the nine instructional skills. The interns who taught grade 7-12 were rated lowest of the three groups in three of the teaching categories. With respect to urban/rural school location of the internship, interns from rural schools were evaluated slightly higher than their urban counterparts for six of the nine skills. For year of the practicum, calculations showed slightly better evaluations in three teaching skills for interns who completed the practicum after 1996, than for those who completed it during the 1986-1995 period. Female interns were rated slightly higher in eight of the nine teaching categories than were their male colleagues. Possible explanations accounting for these minor differences are provided, and implications discussed for the program under study and for their “transferability” (Donmoyer, 1990) to pre-service teacher preparation programs.
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 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".