MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W329558858

The Impact of a Course in Reflective Teaching on Student Teachers at a Local University College

2011· article· en· W329558858 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark A. Minott

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBachelorPsychologyMathematics educationReflective thinkingReflective practicePedagogyReflection (computer programming)CredenceTeaching methodDispositionComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports on a study which examined the impact of a course in Reflective teaching in the third year of a Bachelor of Education degree programme at a local University College. A broader purpose for the study was to continue the process of giving credence to reflective teaching as integral to effective teaching and learning. Specifically, the analysis and discussion of the findings points out that the course aids in the development of student teachers’ reflective teaching and thinking. Findings show that it had positive effects on most students’ general knowledge of reflective teaching, helped to develop their self-knowledge and awareness, a questioning disposition and the application of reflection to their out-of-classroom life. The findings also pointed out that students were interested in applying what was learned about reflective teaching and thinking in the classroom. They also identified the need to develop certain a ffective and professional skills such as: the control and development of certain emotions, being consistent, prioritizing, and the development of English speaking skills

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Citations20
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducationSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207