MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2893296075 · doi:10.21432/cjlt27634

What Is a Digital Electronic Portfolio in Teacher Education? A Case Study of Instructors’ and Students’ Enabling Insights on the Electronic Portfolio Process | Qu'est-ce qu'un portfolio numérique dans la formation des enseignants? Étude de cas sur les perspectives d’enseignants et d’étudiants concernant le processus du portfolio numérique.

2018· article· en· W2893296075 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Tim Hopper, Hong Fu, Katherine Sanford, David H. Monk

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Learning and Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCognitive reframingElectronic portfolioCertificationPortfolioTeacher educationPedagogySociologyHumanitiesPolitical sciencePsychologyBusinessArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professional programs in postsecondary education have long been using electronic portfolios (ePs) for diverse purposes, for example, assessment, certification, showcasing, and learning. However, in our practices of using ePs in teacher education for the past several years, we have found that the question of “what is an eP?” requires substantial unpacking. This paper will offer insights on our evolving understanding on ePs in teacher education based on three interacting areas: (a) rich media reframing how we understand professional learning in a digitally linked world; (b) literature from the last 10 years in the use of ePs; and (c) insights from instructors and students using an eP process in one term of a teacher education program. We conclude with a re-visioning of learning in teacher education in relation to the emerging practices enabled by an eP process.Les programmes professionnels d’éducation supérieure utilisent depuis longtemps des portfolios numériques à des fins diverses, comme l’évaluation, la certification, la mise en valeur et l’apprentissage. Cependant, notre expérience des dernières années relative à l’utilisation des portfolios numériques dans la formation des enseignants révèle que la définition du portfolio numérique nécessite un examen approfondi. Le présent article offre un aperçu de notre conception, toujours en évolution, des portfolios numériques dans la formation des enseignants, basée sur trois domaines en interaction: (a) des contenus médiatiques riches qui restructurent la manière dont nous comprenons l’apprentissage professionnel dans un monde interconnecté par le numérique; (b) la littérature des dix dernières années sur l'utilisation des portfolios numériques; et (c) les perspectives d’instructeurs et d’étudiants ayant utilisé des portfolios numériques durant un trimestre d'un programme de formation des enseignants. En conclusion, nous réimaginons l'apprentissage dans la formation des enseignants en tenant compte des pratiques émergentes rendues possibles par les portfolios numériques.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Learning and TechnologySame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207