The Longer-Term Influences of International Professional Experience on Teachers’ Professional Practice and Growth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intention of this paper is to examine the longer-term impacts of international professional experience (IPE). Participants in the study were all early-career teachers who had participated in IPE as part of their education degree and were invited to participate through the alumni office of an education faculty from one university. Thirty participants took part in this research study by completing an online questionnaire with two continuing on to a focus group discussion. The two data sets – from the online questionnaire and interview transcripts – were scrutinized individually using a deductive approach, informed by the five categories from the integrated works of Willard-Holt (2001) and Pence and Macgillivray (2008) as a framing lens. The impact of IPE on the identity formation, practices and career-based decision making of the focus group participants reiterated what emerged from the literature and questionnaire data. This research highlights the impact that IPE has on future teachers’ sense of self and practice as a teacher, their approach to learning, teaching and education more broadly, and on the decisions, they make about their career options and pathways. This study has implications for the ways in which future teachers are prepared for culturally diverse classrooms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".