MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765147957 · doi:10.1080/02619768.2017.1395852

A teacher educator’s lessons learned from reflective practice

2017· article· en· W2765147957 on OpenAlexaff
Tom Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Teacher Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflective practiceReflection (computer programming)Teacher educationCritical reflectionPedagogyContext (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)Professional developmentMathematics educationPsychologySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article has two major goals. The first is to establish a distinction between the idea of critical reflection (as required today in many teacher education courses) and the concept of reflective practice (as set out by Schön in the context of active professional practice). The second is to present some of the important lessons a teacher educator has learned from reflective practice (not critical reflection) during 40 years of work with pre-service teachers.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.010
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0050.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.358 · 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

Citations63
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Teacher EducationSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207