MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389286740 · doi:10.1080/13611267.2023.2290728

Supporting vocational education interns: what motivates associate teachers and what are the perceived benefits?

2023· article· en· W4389286740 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nathalie Gagnon, Andréanne Gagné, Julie Courcy

Bibliographic record

VenueMentoring & Tutoring Partnership in Learning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMotivation and Self-Concept in Sports
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternshipBachelorVocational educationAction (physics)Meaning (existential)PsychologyLimitingMedical educationPedagogyEngineeringMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Québec (Canada), vocational training centres hire their teachers based on their occupational skills and knowledge.Often without prior pedagogical training, teachers must complete a bachelor university degree including three or four internships.Conducted in their workplace, novices are then accompanied on-site by an assistant teacher (AT).Untrained for this role, there are little to no measures to support ATs in these additional tasks.Based on the testimonies of 15 ATs, this paper aims to expose the motivating factors and perceived benefits of performing this role, and how this plays an important part in the development of competent action and performance.To extract meaning, a qualitative methodology was used, and semi-inductive logic technics were applied.The results detail the ATs' experience in providing support to interns, as well as enlighten the facilitating and limiting factors to their competent action using desire to act theories.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMentoring & Tutoring Partnership in LearningSame topicMotivation and Self-Concept in SportsFrench-language works237,207