MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317651830 · doi:10.1080/03004279.2016.1169486

Pre-service primary teachers negotiating physical education identities during the practicum

2016· article· en· W2317651830 on OpenAlexaff
Tim Fletcher, Clare Kosnik

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation 3-13 · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPracticumPhysical educationNegotiationTeacher educationPedagogyPsychologyIdentity (music)Service (business)Mathematics educationMedical educationSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examined the ways in which pre-service primary teachers’ experiences of physical education during the practicum influenced the development of their identities as teachers of physical education. Guided by a social constructivist view of identity, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 pre-service teachers over one academic year, which involved two four-week practicum placements. Participants’ observations and experiences of teaching physical education during the practicum led them to interpret ways in which they considered themselves similar or different to those teachers responsible for teaching physical education in their placement schools. In this way, participants articulated the extent to which they identified as teachers of physical education following two practicum placements. Recommendations are offered for improving the ways in which pre-service programmes support the development of primary teachers’ identities across subject areas.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.407 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducation 3-13Same topicPhysical Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207