A qualitative examination of early childhood educators’ participation in professional learning: investigating social constructionist understandings of quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the burgeoning literature that describes the most effective ways of engaging early childhood educators in professional learning, very little empirical work in North America has examined the processes, dialogs, and engagements in which educators participate to address quality as a social construct. This article (1) describes a model of professional learning trialed in western Canada that supports educators to engage with social constructionist scholarship on quality and (2) reports on the educators’ and pedagogical facilitators’ experiences with this model. Using a qualitative methodology, the article analyzes data from interviews, focus groups, and open-ended questionnaires completed by educators and pedagogical facilitators. The study’s findings suggest the importance of creating professional learning opportunities that respond to contextual and current conditions over extended periods of time. More importantly, our results show that PD that engages quality as a social construct requires both a multidimensional approach with a wide variety of learning modalities, and the critical role of a skilled pedagogical facilitator who challenges educators to interrogate the ethico-political aspects of early education. The findings of this study have implications not only for the professional learning of early childhood educators but also for early education systems in Canada and abroad.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".