MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401673209 · doi:10.1080/19415257.2024.2374334

Priorities and possibilities for teacher professional learning in a (post)COVID-19 era

2024· article· en· W4401673209 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pamela Osmond-Johnson, Trudy Keil, Hosna Tayebianvar, Nadiya Ekhteraeetoussi

Bibliographic record

VenueProfessional Development in Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEducation Practices and Challenges
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional learning communityProfessional developmentCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Faculty developmentModalitiesPsychologyPedagogyQuality (philosophy)Educational technologySociologyMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to strengthen understandings of both the current status of and future directions around teacher professional learning in Canada. Bearing in mind the significant shifts in teacher professional learning as a result of the pandemic, the paper utilises an existing framework around the features of high-quality professional learning from a prior study to analyse recent trends in teacher learning needs and professional learning modalities to identify priorities and possibilities for the future of teacher learning in the (post) COVID-19 era. Particular attention is paid to what we refer to as the COVID conundrum. On the one hand, the proliferation of online learning opportunities necessitated by the pandemic resulted in an increase in access for educators who have not been served well by traditional face-to-face models of professional learning. By the same token, however, the sheer volume of learning opportunities, combined with the privatisation and globalisation of online teacher learning (Educational International 2020a), presents challenges around ensuring professional learning is relevant and contextualised to local teaching and learning contexts.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0240.019
Scholarly communication0.0200.010
Open science0.0020.015
Research integrity0.0050.009
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.317 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProfessional Development in EducationSame topicEducation Practices and ChallengesFrench-language works237,207