MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392681893 · doi:10.22318/icls2023.819718

Positivist and Constructivist Orientation Impact on Supervisors' Conceptions of Video Use in Teacher Professionalization

2023· article· en· W4392681893 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings. · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsComputer Research Institute of Montréal
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsProfessionalizationConstructivePositivismConstructivist teaching methodsProcess (computing)PsychologyOrientation (vector space)PedagogyMathematics educationSociologyComputer scienceTeaching methodEpistemologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aims at getting insight in the supervisors' conception in the use of video to bridge learning of students and the professionalization of teachers.Therefore, we interviewed supervisors why and how video technologies are being used or not in the process of enhancing their professional practices and collaborative learning with the student teachers.The main finding is that supervisors' knowledge orientation probably has an impact on how they perceive the use of video in their teacher professionalization practice.In fact, both groups (positivist vs. constructivist) are using video but the first group is prioritizing more objective ways to use video technologies and the latter group focuses more on using video in constructive ways to support the learning process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.302 · 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