Bibliographic record
Abstract
This multiple case study investigates how a cohort of thirty-eight elementary teacher candidates (TC) and a volunteer subgroup of eight teacher candidate researchers (TCR) were prepared to use ICT in their teacher education program (TEP). The authors expected social and cultural relationships would contribute to the formation of these beginning teacher’s pedagogical perspectives and practices in relation to ICT. The study examined both TC and TCR uses of ICT from multiple perspectives: as students in the TEP; as teachers in their practicum classrooms; and as research participants. The researchers collected data on how their TEP, and ICT ecologies of learning (ICT-EL) experiences, influenced the formation of TC and TCR ICT perspectives regarding curriculum knowledge (ICT literacies) and pedagogy (ICT practices). This chapter describes the role institutional isomorphism and knowledge and curriculum fragmentation appear to play in the formation of oppositional, or resistant, ICT perspectives. It argues for active socially engaged learning (ASEL), efficacious learning, and critical inquiry as emergent systems that are in a continuous state of formation and change within these institutional contexts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".