MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185217574 · doi:10.18162/fp.2012.175

The Role of Online Interaction as Support for Reflective Practice in Preservice Teachers

2012· article· en· W2185217574 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueFormation et profession · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyReflection (computer programming)Reflective practiceStudent teacherMathematics educationPedagogyTeacher educationQuality (philosophy)Medical educationComputer scienceMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated how online interaction supports reflective practice in preservice teachers through a mailing list. Three groups of preservice teachers in the fourth year of a teacher training program (N=34) were studied using a mixed methods approach: individual and group interviews and an online questionnaire. Results indicate that online interaction plays a secondary supportive role for reflective practice in preservice teachers. However, preservice teachers who got involved in online interaction showed evidence of several functions of reflective thinking and overall reflection on quality. Online interaction also appears to exercise the equally beneficial social and psychoemotional functions. It therefore plays a secondary but positive role in supporting reflective practice in preservice teachers.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.512
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.007
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.462 · 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