Did They Transform Their Teaching Practices? A Case Study on Evaluating Professional Development Webinars Offered to Language Teachers during COVID-19
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Professional development webinars became very common in higher education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Following a case-study research methodology, this study explored the potential of professional development webinars offered to university language teachers in transforming their online pedagogies. A focus group discussion with four university language teachers was conducted. They attended several professional development webinars during the pandemic on online pedagogy, teaching platforms and course management systems, online assessment and research skills. Using transformative learning theory as a theoretical lens for data analysis, the results revealed that webinars enabled teachers to resolve some misconceptions about online teaching and learning, enhanced their critical reflection on their online teaching practices and formed some new practices of online pedagogy. The study provided some implications for higher education to enhance professional development webinars.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it