MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210383918 · doi:10.19183/how.29.1.631

An Overview of Dominant Approaches for Teacher Learning in Second Language Teaching

2022· article· en· W4210383918 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHOW · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Context (archaeology)PedagogyTeacher educationPsychologyTeaching methodLanguage educationMathematics educationLanguage acquisitionFocus (optics)Language teacherSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current review offers an analysis of the prevailing literature on teacher learning in language teaching from an international perspective. We initially revisit several contributions from a general education perspective. Then, we focus on three dominant approaches, identified through the literature, to understand teacher learning from a language teaching perspective. Finally, we provide implications for teacher educators to consider in the preparation of prospective language teachers. These include acknowledging future teachers’ prior cognitions and learning experiences, highlighting the benefits of collaborative work and communities of practice, and adapting and innovating within the social constraints of their teaching context.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.183 · 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