MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956136327 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v8n4p18

Benefits, Difficulties and Conditions of Lesson Study Implementation in Basic Teacher Education: A Review

2019· review· en· W2956136327 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eurydice-Maria Kanellopoulou, Μαρία Δάρρα

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducator Training and Historical Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesson studyProfessional developmentMathematics educationReflection (computer programming)Empirical researchTeacher educationField (mathematics)PedagogyPsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractThe purpose of this study is to review the effectiveness of the implementation of the lesson study in higher education through the review of 28 empirical researches conducted both inGreeceand the world over the past decade (2008-2018). In particular, the benefits, the difficulties and the conditions of effective implementation of the lesson study are examined. The results of the research revealed that the development of co-operation, reflection and professional development of preservice teachers are seen as important advantages due to the implementation of the lesson study. The preparation time, the tensions and the stress resulting from the monitoring of the teaching of their fellow students are mentioned as main difficulties, while participation and cooperation of preservice teachers and their support by trainers are seen as necessary conditions for its successful implementation. There is also a need for further research on the implementation of the lesson study in higher education, mainly inGreece, compared to the international field.

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)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicEducator Training and Historical PedagogyFrench-language works237,207