MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911314433 · doi:10.18806/tesl.v35i2.1297

Locating Continuing Professional Development within a Proposed Complex Dynamic Systems Model for Today's English Language Teaching Profession

2018· article· en· W2911314433 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dianne Tyers, Judy Sillito

Bibliographic record

VenueTESL Canada Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)Context (archaeology)Professional developmentSociologyPedagogyComputer scienceMathematics educationEngineering ethicsPsychologyEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For novice and expert English language teaching professionals alike, it is important to understand the dynamic complexity of the context in which we workto intentionally and strategically forge a relevant and personally meaningful, continuing professional development path. English language teaching has longoutgrown a “one-size-fi ts-all” continuing professional development model. Rather, the context in which we teach influences the knowledge and skills weneed to develop and maintain as we move through our careers. This, in turn, drives the strategic choices we make for our continuing professional development.However, what does context in English language teaching actually mean, and how do we unpack its elements to locate ourselves within it? Using a proposedmodel of nested complex dynamic systems, we can first locate ourselves within a broad socioeconomic, complex dynamic system created by the ongoing interaction of a society’s economy, politics, history, geography, technology, culture, language, and education. We can then locate ourselves within multiple complex dynamic systems in the professional, program, and classroom contexts that give shape to and, at times, constrain our agency. Finally, we can consider ourselves, English language teachers, as complex dynamic systems. Each of us is the unique creation of our interacting education and training, professional experience, and self. This complex dynamic systems model can be used to guide teachers, administrators, and funders to intentionally and strategically select, design, or support continuing professional development, leading to teachers’ building knowledge and practice for ongoing success in a rapidly evolving profession. Qu’il s’agisse de débutants ou de professeurs expérimentés, il est important que les professionnels de l’enseignement de l’anglais comprennent la complexité dynamique du contexte dans lequel nous travaillons afin de pouvoir ouvrir intentionnellement et stratégiquement la voie à un mode de perfectionnement professionnel continu qui soit à la fois pertinent et significatif sur le plan personnel. Il y a longtemps que l’enseignement de l’anglais ne tient plus dans un modèle unique de perfectionnement professionnel continu. Il faut plutôt reconnaître que le contexte dans lequel nous enseignons influe sur les connaissances et les compétences que nous devons développer et entretenir au fil de notre carrière, ce qui a pour effet d’orienter les choix stratégiques que nous effectuons pour notre perfectionnement professionnel continu. Mais que signifie réellement le contexte de l’enseignement de l’anglais, et comment en dégageons-nous les éléments afin de nous y inscrire personnellement? À l’aide d’un modèle suggéré de systèmes dynamiques complexes imbriqués, nous pouvons commencer par nous situer dans un vaste système socioéconomique complexe créé par l’interaction continue de l’économie, de la politique, de l’histoire, de la géographie, de la technologie, de la culture, de la langue, et de l’éducation. Nous pouvons ensuite nous situer à l’intérieur de multiples systèmes dynamiques complexes dans les contextes de la profession, du programme, et de la salle de classe qui donnent forme à notre agentivité et parfois la limitent. Enfin, nous pouvons nous considérer nous-mêmes, en tant que professeurs d’anglais, comme des systèmes dynamiques complexes. Nous sommes toutes et tous le produit unique d’une interaction entre notre éducation et notre formation, notre expérience professionnelle et notre identité. Ce modèle de système dynamique complexe peut être utilisé pour amener les enseignants, les administrateurs, et les bailleurs de fonds à sélectionner, concevoir et appuyer intentionnellement et stratégiquement une forme de perfectionnement professionnel continu susceptible d’amener les enseignantes et les enseignants à accumuler des connaissances et des pratiques qui assureront leur succès dans une profession en évolution rapide.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.184
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.317 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTESL Canada JournalSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207