MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108781558 · doi:10.1007/s12564-020-09654-w

An activity theory approach toward teacher professional development at scale (TPD@Scale): A case study of a teacher learning center in Indonesia

2020· article· en· W3108781558 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cher Ping Lim, Juliana Juliana, Min Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia Pacific Education Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsProfessional developmentPsychologyTeacher educationFaculty developmentEquity (law)Quality (philosophy)Professional learning communityPedagogyGovernment (linguistics)Scale (ratio)Mathematics educationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Continuous teacher professional development (TPD) ensures that teachers have the capacity to continually plan and implement quality teaching and learning that supports students in achieving their expected program/course learning outcomes. However, teachers’ access to quality TPD is a challenge due to geographical limitations, gender, special needs, marginalized communities, and the government’s policies, or lack of policies, regarding teachers. There are tensions between quality and equity, and cost implications that may hinder the scaling up of quality TPD programs. This paper adopts an activity theory approach to examine how a teacher learning center (TLC) in a regency of Indonesia enhances teachers’ access to quality TPD. The findings reveal that teachers learn in the TLC through different TPD activities. Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) are found to mediate the professional learning activities, learning resources, learning support, and assessments in the TLC. Furthermore, three key stakeholders—the local government, teacher working groups, and school principals—play significant roles in supporting teachers’ professional learning in the TLC.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations34
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia Pacific Education ReviewSame topicTeacher Education and Leadership StudiesFrench-language works237,207