Markers of Agency in Preservice Music Teachers: A Directed Content Analysis of Written Coursework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine agentic thinking among preservice music teachers through a “directed content analysis” (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) of the written coursework of 2 cohorts of preservice music teachers (N = 66) enrolled in an introduction to music education course in order to advance knowledge of agentic thinking in music teacher education research and practice. We used a theoretical framework informed by Emirbayer and Mische’s (1998) triadic conception of agency that positions human agency at the nexus of 3 temporally oriented elements: iteration (past), projectivity (future), and practical evaluation (present). We investigated the agentic temporalities of different assignment types and analyzed the agentic vocabulary usage in premidterm and postmidterm assignments by cohort, identified gender, year in school, residency status, major, and applied instrument. We found slight differences in overall agentic vocabulary and vocabulary by agentic element between cohorts. Unexpectedly, we noted a marked decline in overall agentic vocabulary usage in postmidterm written assignments compared to premidterm written assignments. Analysis of change over time by agentic element found decreases in iterative and practical evaluative vocabulary and an increase in projective vocabulary usage in postmidterm written assignments. Findings from key-word-in-context analysis, however, suggest that a decline in agentic vocabulary may be related to a refinement in agentic vocabulary usage and an increased openness to different perspectives and career options. Based on our results, we argue that Emirbayer and Mische’s framework may provide music teacher educators and researchers with a nuanced tool by which to investigate, understand, and foster music teacher agency.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".