MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6926443962 · doi:10.25316/ir-20028

STEM in Canadian teacher education: An overview

2023· book-chapter· en· W6926443962 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueVIUspace · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBachelorTeacher educationHigher educationRaising (metalworking)NarrativeStem cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since emerging as a concept in the 1990s STEM and STEM education has become an area of broad interest in Canada in the past 15 years. STEM programs are well-promoted in science faculties at Canadian universities and associated provincial education programs, raising the question as to the degree to which STEM and courses teaching (about) STEM are present in Faculties of Education in Canada. This chapter presents data drawn from Canadian Bachelor of Education (BEd) academic calendars (n = 56), Canadian academic conferences where research on STEM in BEd programs would be presented (n = 17), and publications from the Council of Ministers of Education to understand what STEM opportunities are available to prospective teachers. Four detailed, narrative descriptions of STEM courses at four faculties of education provide examples of the types of offerings available in Canadian teacher training programs. Overall, we report that in Canadian BEd programs few STEM courses are offered—and even fewer STEM programs—raising questions about the support offered by BEd programs for STEM school initiatives that exist both provincially and federally. Implications of this are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.020
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.003

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVIUspaceSame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207