“It Doesn’t Feel Like a Natural Fit”: Co-operating Teachers Account for Their Evaluation and Assessment of Pre-service Teachers’ Efforts to Fulfill Social Justice Indicators
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
Teacher education has long been troubled by the problem of reconciling what happens in course work with how that learning is taken up in practicum experiences. Our faculty asks co-operating teachers to account for interns’ professional growth by the extent to which the interns meet the requirements of the Internship Placement Profile (IPP). The study focuses on the eight IPP items which relate directly to “teaching for social justice.” The theoretical framework draws upon the literature of anti-oppressive/anti-racist pedagogies. Co-operating teachers and interns are expected to rely on the field manual that lists descriptors for each item of the IPP to assess growth and to set goals. The objective to understand how co-operating teachers perceive their intern’s ability to teach for social justice and reach their final evaluation was modified to reflect the finding that cooperating teachers were sometimes less familiar with these principles than were the interns.
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 | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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