MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381550952 · doi:10.22329/jtl.v17i1.7001

Social-Emotional Learning for Teachers

2023· article· en· W4381550952 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Madora Soutter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Teaching and Learning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningPedagogyCourseworkPreparednessPsychologyTeacher educationSyllabusPracticumSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social and emotional learning (SEL) is a crucial part of student wellness and academic achievement, but teachers’ own SEL is often overlooked. This qualitative study examines educators’ perceptions of their own university-level teacher preparation programs to better understand the ways in which teacher educators can support pre-service teachers’ well-being, preparedness, and longevity in the field. Findings reveal that teachers saw their own transformative SEL—a form of SEL committed to equity and social justice (Jagers et al., 2019)—as a key factor for their success, highlighting the importance of critical and holistic preparation that focuses on the social–emotional development of teachers themselves. Implications focus on practical ways transformative SEL can be infused into teacher preparation programs including redefining success beyond student academics alone, focusing on teacher well-being in a way that does not ignore systemic oppression and school-level barriers, preparing teachers for the realities of roadblocks and ethical dilemmas they may face, and examining syllabi and coursework for the development of transformative SEL competencies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0000.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Teaching and LearningSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207