MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336275832 · doi:10.14288/1.0098403

Perceived instructor effectiveness in Canadian prison adult basic education

2010· article· en· W2336275832 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Heather Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrisonAdult educationPsychologySocial psychologyPedagogyCriminology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the latter part of the 1980's, contracting by the Correctional Service of Canada with private and public institutions accelerated. This contracting included provision of educational programs. Therefore, as a result of a new emphasis upon Canadian literacy education during the same period, there arose a need to select numbers of contract personnel who would be effective in prison adult basic education teaching. Subsequently, eighteen teachers in the Ontario and Pacific Regions of the Correctional Service of Canada were subjects of a study that sought information about effectiveness criteria to assist in the selection of teachers for prison adult basic education teaching. The Evaluation of Teacher Behaviors rating instrument established an upper quartile that identified five prison adult basic education teachers perceived as most effective, and a lower quartile of five prison adult basic education teachers perceived as least effective. Teachers completed the Demographic Data Questionnaire, providing information about academic education, teaching experience, additional training and education, and certification. They then participated in a structured, oral interview, the Correctional Teacher Interview Survey, responding to questions about their teaching strategies and their personal beliefs regarding the effects of prison education. Three experienced correctional educators rated these responses according to criteria that suggested possession of qualities such as sense of mission, structure, and empathy. Three teachers from the high group also responded to the Supplementary Questionnaire, which asked for their perceptions of their own schooling, relevant life experiences, and attitudes to their students as individuals. Analysis of the results of the Evaluation of Teacher Behaviors indicated statistically significant differentiation between the two groups on each of eleven criteria, with greatest differentiation for the criteria original, overall effective, adaptable, and stimulating. Analysis of responses to the Demographic Data Questionnaire showed that in the high group there was a greater percentage of teachers who had recently been involved in supplementary training and continuing education experiences. The low group of teachers possessed more years of experience in public/parochial school teaching than did teachers in the high group. The three correctional educators who rated the subject teachers' responses to the Correctional Teachers Interview Survey found that the teachers in the high group scored better on the characteristics clarity, desire to help students grow, structure, and empathy than did teachers in the low group. Analysis revealed that both the students who rated the eighteen teachers on the Evaluation of Teacher Behaviors instrument and the three correctional educators who rated the responses of the same teachers to the Correctional Teacher Interview Survey had, according to these ratings, similarly placed eight of the ten subject teachers in their respective high and low groups. The Supplementary Questionnaire revealed that three teachers from the high group possessed similar experiences in their personal and professional backgrounds and currently employed similar teaching strategies. Findings from this study have suggested that teachers who are perceived effective may possess behavioral characteristics, life and work experiences, and similar teaching strategies that distinguish them from those who are perceived to be low in effectiveness. Appropriate application and interview techniques could be designed to elicit information about these distinguishing elements.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207