Organization of media training intended for teachers in the United States and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the time of digital technologies and transformation of teachers’ role, the problem of the lack of teachers’ media education support and their insufficient level of readiness to implement media technologies in educational process has become of vital importance. The analysis of American scientists’ ideas has resulted in the conclusion about irreversible consequences of an insufficient level of teachers’ media education that may lead to the loss of democracy in society. In the article, the author stresses the idea about the interconnection between the teachers’ level of training to incorporate media education in the process of learning and its efficiency. It is underlined that this understanding shown by state educational establishments, administrative staff, scientists and teachers is not widely accepted, which is proved by the quantity of media courses, character of training in universities and the time of such training appearance in the curriculum of pedagogical educational establishments. Until recently, in spite of inclusion of media education knowledge in curricular, teachers have been left without proper training in such an activity in the system of formal education. On the example of a number of American and Canadian universities (Indiana University Bloomington, University of Massachusetts, Manitoba University, Vancouver University), the author has distinguished the ways of future teacher media training in formal education (as special training in the area of communication, as a separate course, as components of every course, taught at university). The main peculiarity of the future teacher media training is the encouraging Centres for Online and Digital Learning and libraries which offer necessary support in conducting lessons with digital media tools, media services, consultations on doing media tasks and incorporating media in educational process in schools.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".