The expectations-reality dissonance in student teaching: a discourse analysis of one pre-service teacher’s perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Student teaching has been conceptualized as an experience that translates into ample teaching practice and meaningful teacher knowledge. Such a conceptualization misses issues that emerge from student teaching as social practice (i.e., the distinctive ways people engage in activities associated with a particular domain of knowledge in a specific social context). Using interview data from a larger qualitative study that investigated pre-service teachers’ learning experiences, I conducted a discourse analysis of Lany’s perspective on her student teaching experience. Unlike other student teachers, Lany perceived the social practices at her placement to be unjust, holding student teaching with contempt and wanting it shortened. Findings indicated an expectations-reality dissonance in student teaching and the reproduction of socially constructed school norms and unequal social relations between school personnel and Lany. These constrained Lany’s abilities to practice teaching and shaped her identities. The study sheds light on the need for teacher educators and other tangential agents to more actively advocate for those who are apprenticing teachers to ensure quality education.
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 | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".