Professional autonomy vs. assessment criteria: teacher agency in the midst of assessment reform
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
In Finland, there are no high-stakes tests in comprehensive education, but teachers assign students’ final grades. A recent reform introduced a set of assessment criteria to make grades more comparable across Finland. Based on interviews with 66 lower secondary school teachers, the present study examines how Finnish teachers used their agency in the face of this assessment reform. Understanding teacher agency is of great importance, as it plays a key role in mediating teachers’ public power through final assessment. Using typology analysis, we constructed five teacher types, each reflecting a particular type of agency: the enthusiast, the willing executor, the obedient critic, the immune and the rebel. The nature of teachers’ involvement in the reform varied between the types. The differences in teachers’ agency highlight the importance of understanding different types of teacher agency when implementing assessment reforms and providing appropriate support for all types of teachers.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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