MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954493679 · doi:10.5539/jel.v8n4p64

Exploring the Differences Between Educational Consultant’s and Teachers’ Perceptions on Teachers’ Needs of Professional Development

2019· article· en· W2954493679 on OpenAlex
Nada Wehbe

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCollaborative Teaching and Inclusion
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionPsychologyProfessional developmentMedical educationMultimethodologyQualitative researchFaculty developmentPedagogySociologyMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aims to investigate whether there is a discrepancy between educational consultants and teachers’ perceptions on teachers’ needs of professional development. The study also intends to answer the following research question: Is there a discrepancy between the perceptions of educational consultants and teachers of teachers’ needs in professional development? Moreover, two sub research questions were addressed: How do teachers perceive their needs for PD? How do educational consultants prepare for PD sessions/programs? The participants of the study are twenty pre/lower elementary school teachers and one educational consultant in Beirut. The methodology used to conduct the study was mixed-methods: a qualitative analysis was conducted for the consultant’s interview questions and a quantitative analysis for the teachers’ questionnaire. Results showed slight differences between the perceptions of teachers on PD and that of the consultant.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.284 · 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