MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2472387903 · doi:10.1515/rpp-2016-0014

The Analysis of Content and Operational Components of Public School Teachers’ Continuing Professional Development in Great Britain, Canada and the USA

2016· article· en· W2472387903 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Professional Pedagogy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Issues and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional developmentInterviewNormativeContent analysisUkrainianLegislatureContinuing educationContinuing professional developmentPedagogySociologyPolitical scienceMathematics educationPsychologyMedical educationMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the article the content and operational components of continuing professional development of public school teachers in Great Britain, Canada, the USA have been characterized. The main objectives are defined as the theoretical analysis of scientific-pedagogical literature, which highlights different aspects of the problem under research; identification of the common features of the content, models, forms and methods of continuing professional development of public school teachers. The legislative and normative framework of teachers’ CPD in Great Britain, Canada and the USA, which determines the CPD content, has been highlighted; teachers’ knowledge, skills, professional values and attitudes have been characterised; the key models, forms and methods of teachers’ CPD have been defined. The teachers’ CPD has been studied by foreign and Ukrainian scientists: models, forms and methods of teachers’ CPD (L. Chance, A. Hollingsworth, D. Ross, E. Villegas-Reimers), non-formal teachers’ CPD (J. Scheerens), continuing professional education (Ya. Belmaz, T. Desyatov), postgraduate education (A. Kuzminskyy, V. Russol), professional education (R. Hurevych, N. Nychkalo), teacher training (T. Koshmanova, Ye. Yevtukh), teachers’ professional development (N. Klokar, V. Oliynyk). The research methodology comprises theoretical (logical, induction and deduction, comparison and compatibility, structural and systematic, analysis and synthesis) and applied (observations, questioning and interviewing) methods. The research results have been presented.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.269 · 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