Teacher Candidates Peer-Oriented Triads: Transforming Practice through Peer Assessment During Field Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2018 a teacher education program at a small research university implemented three initiatives to improve the practicum experience for teacher candidates. This program evaluation focusses on one of three initiatives, specifically, peer-oriented triads during practicum. The faculty members used the Spiral of Inquiry (Kaser & Halbert, 2017) as a framework to guide the implementation and assess the viability of triads during practicum, and to assess their worthwhileness. Teacher candidates tended to feel isolated and judged after a practicum experience. The implementation and intention of triads was to provide teacher candidates with ongoing feedback, support, and learning opportunities with peers from their cohort during practicum. Triads, or groups of three, were an ideal group size for sense-making, problem-solving, and collaborating. The feedback provided at the end of the program during the Celebration of Learning was that triads were valued and were considered a safe place to learn.
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 | 0.031 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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".