MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912503464 · doi:10.18806/tesl.v35i2.1290

"Batting the Piñata and Swallowing Camels": Teachers Learn to PBLA in the Absence of Dialogic Interaction

2018· article· en· W2912503464 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Yuliya Desyatova

Bibliographic record

VenueTESL Canada Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDialogicPedagogyPsychologyMedicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes teacher professional development (PD) mandated by the implementation of portfolio-based language assessment (PBLA) in government-funded adult language learning programs in Canada. Through the lens of conceptualizations of teacher learning (TL), the study examined PBLA teacher-trainingmaterials, 247 teacher surveys, and participant interviews pertaining to two contrasting cases. The analysis of teacher experiences in PBLA PD revealed limited theoretical and empirical connections to recent developments in second language teacher education (SLTE). While current SLTE research emphasizes self-directed TL, the PBLA train-the-trainer model demonstrates top-down knowledge transmission with a potentially undermining evaluative component. The hierarchical transmission of knowledge created for teachers without opportunities for knowledge building by teachers contradicts current understandings of TL as a complex sociocultural activity. Limited effectiveness of PBLA as a TL experience may be further diminished by its potential use for punitive surveillance, as demonstrated in the extreme case analysis. As a result of this study, Richards and Farrell’s conceptualizations of TL were complemented with an additional perspective informed by sociocultural theory—TL as dialogic interaction. The disconnect of PBLA vision and practice from current SLTE requires further research and attention from policymakers. Cet article analyse le perfectionnement professionnel (PP) des enseignants tel que mandaté par la mise en œuvre de l’évaluation linguistique basée sur le portfolio (ELBP) dans le contexte des cours de langue pour adultes fi nancés par le gouvernement du Canada. À la lumière des conceptualisations de Richards et Farrell en matière de formation des enseignants, l’étude analyse le matériel de formation des enseignants de l’ELBP ainsi que 247 sondages d’enseignants et des entrevues de participants portant sur deux études de cas contrastantes. L’analyse des expériences des enseignants dans le domaine du PP en lien avec l’ELBP a révélé une pénurie de liens théoriques et empiriques avec les développements récents dans le domaine de la formation des enseignants en anglais langue seconde (SLTE). Alors que les recherches actuelles en matière de SLTE mettent l’accent sur le PP autogéré, le modèle the formation des formateurs de l’ELBP se caractérise par une approche descendante de la transmission du savoir accompagnée d’une composante d’évaluation potentiellement affaiblissante. La transmission hiérarchique du savoir créée pour des enseignants qui n’ont pas de possibilités d’accumuler eux-mêmes des connaissances contredit les conceptions actuelles du PP comme activité socioculturelle complexe. L’efficacité limitée de l’ELBP comme expérience de PP pourra se voir réduire encore davantage par l’utilisation potentielle de surveillance à des fins punitives, tel que le démontre l’analyse de cas extrêmes. À la suite de cette étude, les conceptualisations de PP de Richards et Farrell ont acquis une nouvelle dimension inspirée par la théorie socioculturelle—le PP comme interaction dialogique. L’écart entre la vision et la pratique en ELBP dans le domaine de la formation des enseignants en anglais langue seconde exige des études plus poussées et doit attirer l’attention des décideurs politiques.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTESL Canada JournalSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207