Study of the Professional Standard Assessment by Young Teachers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Professional standard of a teacher is a document that takes into account all the requirements for teacher’s personality and professional competence. From now on teacher’s qualification level will be assigned in accordance with this regulatory act. It should also be considered when recruiting a teacher and in drafting his job description. This document details all the knowledge and skills that teachers should possess, and also specifies labor activities depending on the direction of work (teacher in a preschool institution, primary school teacher, subject school teacher, etc.). It is expected that due to the introduction of a professional standard, top-ranking specialists who can work with various categories of children (gifted, disabled, orphans, migrants, etc.) and effectively interact with other specialists (special education teachers, psychologists, social educators and etc.) will form the basis of Russian educational system. This study was conducted in the context of a cross-cultural research of professional teaching standards: on the understanding of professional standards by teachers in five countries. Participating countries: Scotland, Portugal, Russia (1st stage), Canada and Australia (2nd stage). The purpose of the study is to analyze the features of teacher’s professional standard assessment by young teachers, and empirically compare the features of teacher’s professional standard assessment by young teachers and by experienced ones. The study involved 258 teachers of educational institutions, among them - 35 men and 193 women. The age of the subjects is from 24 to 54 years. The experience of pedagogical activity varies from 3 to 35 years. The data obtained allow us to state that the majority of young teachers believe that professional standards are useful for evaluation teachers' work; professional standards state a constructive policy aimed at improving learning; professional standards are a suitable tool to support professional development of teachers. At the same time, young educators note that professional standards entail bureaucratic control over teachers, and that professional standards are the way to increase teacher accountability. In general, young teachers have a positive attitude to professional standards, however, there is a fear of increasing the bureaucratic pressure on them.
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 | 0.000 | 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".