Faculty Supervisors’ Conceptions of Clinical Supervision in Early Childhood Teachers’ Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past 30 years, studies of teaching and learning in schools have demonstrated that, to improve our educational systems, there is no better strategy than a significant and sustained investment in well-prepared teachers. Within the landscape of teacher development, a critical part of the terrain is clinical experience, which refers to supervised, direct experiences in teaching provided for pre-service teachers. Clinical experiences have been identified as crucial to strengthen teacher education becausethey offer students an essential bridge between the conceptual tools gained in a university classroom and the realities that occur in the social and physical context of schools. However, despite the growing recognition of the importance of clinical experiences on teachers’ preparation, supervision of practicum remains an underutilized resource in teacher education and the work of faculty supervisors is still understudied. The paucity of studies examining and documenting the work of faculty supervisors is a reflection of the weak visibility that this key actor has in teachers’ education. This paper presents the preliminary results of a study using phenomenograpic inquiry to identify the different ways in which faculty supervisors of Chilean early childhood teachers experience and understand supervision of pre-service teachers during practicum.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".