MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285143526 · doi:10.54884/s181570410019957-7

Comparative analysis of application of the teacher professional standard in countries with high indicators of education quality

2022· article· en· W4285143526 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMan and Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Teacher Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional developmentPrestigeProfessional associationPolitical scienceChinaProfessional studiesQuality (philosophy)Public relationsPedagogySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the results of a study of teachers' professional standards in countries that consistently perform well according to PISA results, including China (Shanghai), Singapore, Canada (Ontario), Finland, England, and New Zealand. In order to find an answer to the question of what makes professional standards a development instrument of teachers' professional skills, practices of design, implementation, and development of teachers' professional standards were studied. The study included an analysis, comparison, and identification of common and unique features of professional standards for teachers in the leading countries, as well as methodological materials, recommendations, and documents publicly available on the websites of ministries (departments) of education and higher education institutions of the countries studied. Analytical reports, reports, newsletters and methodological materials published by international organizations on professional standards in education and professional development of teachers - World Bank, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, National Center for Education and Economics, McKinsey & Company, SEAMEO INNOTECH, Research Institute of International and Comparative Education, Economic Forum "Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation" were reviewed to study the experience of applying professional standards. The study identified characteristic approaches to the development of professional standards, which allow its application as a mechanism for solving the problems of educational policy of the country (territory); increasing the teacher’s status of and the prestige of the profession; teacher’s career and professional growth; formation of a system for evaluating the teacher’s professional development; formation of ethical standards of the profession. The results and conclusions of the study can be the basis for the development of professional standards in education and modeling the system of teacher growth.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.336 · 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