MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6942620999 · doi:10.14288/1.0438700

Re-imagining professional development for social and emotional learning : a case study

2024· article· en· W6942620999 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional learning communityProfessional developmentContext (archaeology)Collaborative learningFaculty developmentSocial emotional learningPlan (archaeology)Community of practiceReflective practice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This single descriptive case study explores how ongoing and collaborative inquiry-based professional development supports educators as they explore, develop, and apply practices that promote social and emotional learning (SEL) beyond the typical conventions of SEL programs. Educators from a large suburban school district in British Columbia, Canada, participated in a professional development initiative that spanned the 20192020 school year. Together, the teachers examined how they could provide students with opportunities to practice and apply SEL skills within classroom routines, academic instruction, and learning activities. The research study was designed to investigate the following questions: (1) How do educators enact SEL-promoting practices in their classrooms? (2) How does engaging in collaborative inquiry-based professional development support educators in their efforts to explore, develop, and apply SEL-promoting practices beyond the typical conventions of SEL programs? (3) How did COVID-19 impact teachers’ SEL practice? (The third question was developed in response to the unprecedented and unexpected context created by the COVID-19 pandemic.) Findings from this study suggest the importance of educators learning together in a community in which they can ideate, share stories, exchange resources, engage in reflective dialogue, plan instruction, and apply their learning. Results underscore the importance of attending to the relational elements of learning for both teachers and students, including co-creating learning environments that attend to learners’ emotions, foster trust, and promote academic risk taking. Implications for the role of ongoing and collaborative professional development and SEL-supportive practices 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)0.013
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.015
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0040.010
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→