MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402548149 · doi:10.5539/hes.v14n4p73

E-Based Practicum: A COVID-19 Model Worthy of Retention for Student-Teachers in Guyana

2024· article· en· W4402548149 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michelle Semple-McBean, Lidon Lashley

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher Education Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPracticumCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Mathematics education2019-20 coronavirus outbreakHigher educationPedagogyPsychologySociologyMedical educationPolitical scienceMedicineVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Practicum is critical to the teacher education programme at the University of Guyana. Practicum offers opportunities and experiences for skills development and simulations to enable student-teachers to acquire and demonstrate effective pedagogical practices and innovations. In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic reconfigured practicum to e-based modes, capitalising on mock teaching and video-stimulated reviews. A descriptive survey allowed 241 student-teachers to visualise and categorise their experiences, challenges and potential opportunities from this new learning mode. The elements of e-based practicum that make it worthy of retention include its capacity for autonomous off-campus learning and experimentation, partnership and equitable relations, performance pacing and gauging, archiving of pedagogical growth, technology literacy skills development, and reflective and self-correcting practice. The experiences of these student-teachers could help (re)shape the practicum delivery for future cohorts and be informative for reviewing and upgrading practicum courses that rely solely on physical classroom interactions, observations, and supervision.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.312
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.294
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher Education StudiesSame topicCommunity Development and Social ImpactFrench-language works237,207