MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111652308 · doi:10.5430/ijhe.v10n2p284

The Construction of Teacher Identity in Education for Sustainable Development: The Case of Chinese ESP Teachers

2020· article· en· W3111652308 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wenjin Qi, Nadezda Sorokina, Yan Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Higher Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSustainability in Higher Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersShanxi Scholarship Council of ChinaYuncheng University
KeywordsAcknowledgementIdentity (music)Professional developmentPedagogyCurriculumTeacher educationSociologyEducation for sustainable developmentSustainable developmentPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the education for sustainable development (ESD) has been advocated in diverse educational contexts, increasingly more attention has been paid to facilitate teachers as the promoters of such educational practice in higher education. Yet, less sufficient research has focused on the ESP (English for Specific Purposes) teachers, who are regarded as the pioneers of ESD practice, and their professional development. This study aims to promote teacher professional development in the area of ESD practice by investigating the identity construction of eight ESP teachers from a northern Chinese university. Drawing on a model of ESP teacher identity, the authors conducted life-history interviews concerning the five frames of identity construction. The results reveal a complex picture of ESP teachers’ professional identity construction. It is revealed that a majority of participants claimed a sense of achievement in their teaching of ESP skills and sustainability competences in graduates for the local socioeconomic development. However, their professional identification is undermined by such factors as the marginalization of ESP as a legitimate discipline, lack of acknowledgement of ESD in curriculum design, and teachers’ professional insecurity resulted from their professional incompetence and low academic status. This study provides a new and innovative perspective on the issue of ESD development in higher education.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.345
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Higher EducationSame topicSustainability in Higher EducationFrench-language works237,207