The practicum-mentor identity in the teacher education context
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes the practicum-mentors’ identity in a teacher education context based on Dialogical Self Theory (DST) and the related ‘position’ and ‘I-position’ concepts. Participants were 48 Spanish and Canadian primary and secondary teachers who participated via an online written survey. The data were analysed using qualitative and quantitative procedures. Findings show a comprehensive description of nine types of positions and twenty types of I-positions. Based on these categories, three clusters of practicum-mentors, which represent three different ways of being a mentor, were identified: (1) a collaborative partner focused on student-teacher (ST) professional development, including the design, and teaching of ST skills acquisition; (2) a collaborative partner focused on design, teaching, and assessment of ST skills acquisition, and (3) a coaching partner focused on teaching and individualised ST learning. The findings can promote closer collaboration between universities and schools concerning the design of more relevant professional development for mentors based on the three identified ways of being a mentor.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it