MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123276544

Understanding the Early Career Teachers’ Needs: Findings from the Pan-Canadian Survey

2020· article· en· W3123276544 on OpenAlexaffabout
Benjamin Kutsyuruba, Keith Walker, Ian Matheson, John Bosica

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipTeacher inductionSocializationCareer developmentSituatedCareer PathwaysFaculty developmentPedagogyProfessional developmentPolitical sciencePublic relationsPsychologySociologyMedical educationSocial psychologyMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Socialization of early career teachers (ECTs) across Canada is situated within the dynamic contextual landscape which both influences their development and practice and also dictates professional expectations. Our pan-Canadian research study examined the differential impact of induction and mentorship programs on ECTs’ retention across the provinces and territories of Canada. This article outlines the results from a pan-Canadian Teacher Induction Survey (N=1343) that examined ECTs’ experiences with induction support, mentorship, working environment, and career development. Our findings showed that despite geographic, contextual and policy differences, there were similarities in the needs of ECTs regarding the induction, mentoring, and administrative supports for career development. This study provides insight and feedback about what is working well and what might be improved upon in terms of policies, initiatives and processes for mentoring, induction, and retention practices for the early career teachers in Canada.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.082 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207