MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2918249096 · doi:10.5539/hes.v9n2p57

From a Guided Teacher into Leader: A Three-Stage Professional Development (TSPD) Model for Empowering Teachers

2019· article· en· W2918249096 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anat Abramovich, Shirley Miedijensky

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional developmentPsychologyFaculty developmentPedagogyMedical educationMathematics educationSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three-stage professional development (TSPD) model for training experienced teachers to become teachers’ leaders is presented here, along with a study assessing its value. The three stages of the model are:  a “basic training” stage, a “master-teacher” stage, and an “independent implementation” stage. This qualitative study included open questionnaires and interviews of participants and course leader after the various stages. Statements were classified accordingly to three main themes: ‘teachers as pedagogues’, ‘teachers’ involvement in environmental science (ES) community’, and ‘teachers’ as leaders’. Results show that participating in the TSPD course enabled teachers to unify into one coherent community with similar goals, increased their self-confidence, empowered them as teachers by improving classroom function, and intensified their abilities to act as teachers’ leaders. This model, although tested on environmental science teachers, is applicable to any teacher community.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicDiverse Educational Innovations StudiesFrench-language works237,207