Modelling in Teacher Education: Beliefs of Teacher Educators in Rwanda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aims to explore teacher educators’ beliefs about role modelling in teacher education in Rwanda. This study hopes to contribute to filling the gap created by limited empirical study available on teacher educators and the relevance of role modelling for high quality teacher training. The study was designed as an exploratory qualitative research using semi-structured interviews of 20 purposively and conveniently selected teacher educators. Content analysis was used to analyze collected data. The findings reveal that participating teacher educators believe that role modelling is an important component in the process of teaching teachers. Moreover, participants hold beliefs about role modelling as implicit exemplar practices and behavior. They think that teaching teachers involves not only providing knowledge but also serving as a good example in both teaching practices and behavior at training institutions as well as in the society. The study concludes that both implicit and explicit modelling should be included in the overall reflections of policy, research and practice of pedagogy of teacher education and especially in the professional development of teacher educators. Further empirical studies are recommended about the implications of implicit modelling on student teachers’ learning outcomes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".