“Just listen to us”: The Role of Teacher Empowerment in the Implementation of Responsiveness to Intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Teachers play a vital role in the implementation of new programs. This article discusses how best to support teachers in the face of such change. Specifically, we describe the perspectives of teachers who participated in a pilot project of the responsiveness to intervention model. Through focus group data, the researchers explored the barriers that teachers encountered during the first year of implementation as well as the supports that allowed them to overcome some of these barriers. Despite these supports, one major barrier persisted: all the participants in this study described feelings of powerlessness. This article explores the roots of these frustrations and highlights the resulting role that teacher empowerment can play in the successful implementation of new programs.Les enseignants jouent un rôle crucial dans la mise en œuvre des nouveaux programmes. Cet article discute de façons d’appuyer les enseignants face à ce genre de changement. Plus spécifiquement, nous décrivons les perspectives des enseignants ayant participé à un projet pilote portant sur le modèle de la réceptivité à l’intervention. Puisant dans les données provenant de groupes de consultation, les chercheurs ont étudié tant les barrières auxquelles les enseignants font face la première année de la mise en œuvre que les appuis qui leur avaient permis de surmonter certaines de ces barrières. Malgré ces appuis, une barrière importante demeurait : tous les participants à cette étude ont décrit un sentiment d’impuissance. Cet article analyse les racines de ces frustrations et fait ressortir le rôle subséquent que peut jouer le renforcement de l’autonomie des enseignants dans la mise en œuvre réussie des nouveaux programmes.
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 | 0.037 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".