Professional learning of instructors in vocational and professional education
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents insights from a study into instructor professional learning in vocational and professional education (VPE) in Canada. While most studies on instructor learning focus on learning through formal professional development programmes, this study specifically focuses on professional learning as it happens in day-to-day practice. Analysis of 116 learning episodes reported by 27 instructors from various institutes for VPE shows that instructor learning is mainly focused on developing pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). Learning episodes studied were often externally prompted, not self-directed and involved mostly action-oriented reflection. Ellström’s theory of adaptive and developmental learning is used to further explain these findings. Because of the specialized nature of the content taught in VPE programmes, formal training in PCK is often not available; instructors rely on trial and error, student feedback and peer feedback to develop PCK. Educational leaders within institutes for VPE should consider encouraging professional development models that include collegial dialogue, such as mentoring and communities of practice, as well as the implementation and enactment of professional learning plans. Further research could focus on how existing workplace practices may be enhanced to further support instructor professional learning.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it