MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294381377 · doi:10.7202/1036104ar

A Survey of Ethics Curriculum in Canadian Initial Teacher Education

2016· article· en· W2294381377 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Bruce Maxwell, Audrée-Anne Tremblay-Laprise, Marianne Filion

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumPerceptionTeacher educationPedagogyInformation ethicsSociologyEngineering ethicsApplied ethicsMedical educationPolitical sciencePsychologyMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports the results of a survey on ethics education in initial teacher education in Canada. Using an online survey and an academic calendar analysis, data was collected on ethics course requirements, perceptions about ethics content, institutional factors mediating the implementation of ethics courses, and teaching and learning objectives. Unexpectedly, the results showed that a required ethics course is as common in teacher education in Canada as it is in medical education and that an ethics curriculum is regarded highly by Canadian teacher educators as an aspect of teacher education. The paper concludes by suggesting directions for future research and underlining the need for network building in the area of ethics education for teachers in Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.604
GPT teacher head0.597
Teacher spread0.007 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGillSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207