MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rethinking 21st Century Professional Development

2013· article· en· W2512758688 on OpenAlexaff
Susan E. Gibson, Charmaine Brooks

Bibliographic record

VenueLiteracy Information and Computer Education Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Technology Integration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevelopment (topology)Engineering ethicsPolitical scienceEngineering managementBusinessEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we conceptualize and describe the key characteristics of a model for technologymediated professional learning that capitalizes on the affordances of our digital age while fostering a culture of professional inquiry and discernment. Our interest in this area arises from insights gathered from teachers, school administrators and districtlevel professional development providers during a 2005 study of the professional development experiences provided to guide the implementation of a new curriculum in a local school district. The participants' stories pointed to PD experiences that were limited in their effectiveness due to content overload, lack of applicability to the class, poor timing requiring teacher pull-out from the classroom, lack of attention to teachers' concerns, and, teacher resistance to change. Recommendations were made that the district may wish to consider online teacher professional development as a way to allow more teacher control of their own professional learning in terms of timing, content and accessibility. A recent survey of research on the field points to a shift to a technology mediated professional learning model that makes better use of the evolution of the Web.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.068
Scholarly communication0.0170.017
Open science0.0020.018
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiteracy Information and Computer Education JournalSame topicEducation and Technology IntegrationFrench-language works237,207