MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401252506 · doi:10.1007/s10758-024-09771-0

Drivers of Digital Realities for Ongoing Teacher Professional Learning

2024· article· en· W4401252506 on OpenAlexaff
Ottavia Trevisan, Rhonda Christensen, Kerstin Drossel, Sharon Friesen, Alona Forkosh‐Baruch, Michael Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology Knowledge and Learning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversità degli Studi di Padova
KeywordsTransformative learningEducational technologyProfessional developmentBoundary objectSociologyTechnology integrationEngineering ethicsTeacher educationKnowledge managementPedagogyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In an era marked by the widespread use of digital technology, educators face the need to constantly learn and develop their own new literacies for the information era, as well as their competencies to teach and apply best practices using technologies. This paper underscores the vital role of ongoing teacher professional learning (OTPL) with a focus on reflective practices and pedagogical reasoning and action (PR&A) in shaping education quality and equity. Examining three key drivers of educational transformation—big data and learning analytics, Artificial Intelligence (AI), and shifting teacher identities—the paper explores their overall impact on teacher practices. This paper emphasizes technology as a crucial boundary object, a catalyst of educational transformation, when used to foster communication and professional growth. To this end, three boundary objects are identified, namely dashboards, AI-driven professional learning environments, and digital communities of practice. These tools illustrate technology’s capacity to mediate relationships between transformative educational drivers and teacher practices, offering a pathway to navigate shifting perspectives on OTPL. With a theoretical foundation in equitable education, the paper provides insights into the intricate relationship between boundary objects and evolving educational dynamics. It highlights technology's pivotal role in achieving both quality and equitable education in the contemporary educational landscape. It presents a nuanced understanding of how specific tools may contribute to effective OTPL amid rapid educational transformations.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0190.011
Open science0.0010.012
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology Knowledge and LearningSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207