MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945371758 · doi:10.1080/09500693.2019.1615656

From science teacher to ‘teacher scientist’: exploring the experiences of research-active science teachers in the UK

2019· article· en· W2945371758 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Elizabeth A. C. Rushton, Michael Reiß

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Science Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicScience Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRoyal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851W. Garfield Weston Foundation
KeywordsEnthusiasmThematic analysisIncentiveProfessional developmentPedagogyScience educationIdentity (music)PsychologyVariety (cybernetics)Professional learning communityTeacher leadershipMathematics educationTeacher educationQualitative researchSociologySocial psychologyEducational leadershipSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore the professional identities of UK-based secondary science teachers who actively participated in science research for at least six months. The study uses thematic analysis to analyse semi-structured interviews with 17 participants across England and Scotland, from a variety of educational/socio-economic contexts. We found that through participation in research projects, teachers develop a multi-faceted sense of professional identity that includes the roles of teacher, scientist/researcher, mentor and coach. Teachers who are research-active develop complex professional networks that have a positive impact upon their sense of professional worth and self-belief. Through participation in research, teachers identified as both science teachers and scientists and this has been encapsulated in this research as a transition in professional identity to ‘teacher scientist’. The key enabling factor in identification as a ‘teacher scientist’ is a teacher’s positive interaction with scientists/researchers. Teachers are motivated to participate in research projects in response to the enthusiasm of their students and a desire for students to contribute to research that could provide solutions to real-world challenges. This understanding of the capacity of science teachers to become ‘teacher scientists’, and recognising teachers' altruistic motivations, could contribute to teacher retention and recruitment strategies that are less focused on financial incentives.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.016
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 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

Citations46
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Science EducationSame topicScience Education and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207