MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pre-Service Teachers’ Perspectives on Learning to Teach Social Studies in a Technology-Rich Pedagogy Course

2012· book-chapter· en· W2496589232 on OpenAlexaff
Susan E. Gibson

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedagogyVariety (cybernetics)Teacher educationPsychologySocial workMathematics educationTeaching methodComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preparing new teachers for teaching with technology is a multi-faceted process. The study reported in this chapter examined the impact that immersion in two technology-enriched, pre-service social studies pedagogy courses had on the way beginning teachers approached technology use in their teaching of social studies. The study took place over two years and tracked education students through their social studies pedagogy course experiences and their practice teaching as part of their teacher preparation program then into their first year of teaching. The findings identified that the pre-service pedagogy courses did assist in increasing the education students’ understanding of a variety of ways to approach the use of various technology tools as well as their willingness to use them in their teaching. However, the results also point to the importance of pre-service teachers’ developing a positive attitude and a willingness to take risks with technology; of all instructors being prepared to infuse technology use in their classes in ways that fit with what is current in the schools; and of schools and mentor teachers encouraging, supporting, and modeling best practice with technology.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207