Collaborative Learning to Foster Critical Reflection by Pre-service Student Teachers within a Canadian–South African Partnership
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
Teachers often enter practice with a narrow perspective of teaching. Through critical reflection, the minds of pre-service teachers can be opened to the bigger realities of teaching and social justice practice. Paired pre-service student teachers from two diverse university settings, Canada and South Africa, were immersed in a collaborative learning experience that involved exchanges through email, text messages, and artwork collages. As lecturers, we implemented action research to determine how to foster critical reflection by pre-service teachers from diverse education contexts. We anticipated the diverse contexts to serve as a disrupting incident in support of critical reflection and possibly also transformative learning. Findings confirm that the collaborative reflective learning across contexts supported the development of critical reflective skills and provided an opportunity for students to confront their own assumptions of ethical and moral teaching practice. Revised strategies are suggested to support deeper critical reflections in collaborative learning across teaching contexts to support transformative learning.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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