Curriculum change in the classroom : a teacher-based inquiry / by Connie Morrice.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is an enthnographic study of six elementary classroom teachers in a large \nsouthern Ontario school board of over 100 schools. The study addresses the \nproblem of reconciling commonly assumed theories in the field and the theories-inaction \nthat guide the daily practice of teachers in their classrooms by attempting to \nascertain what teachers' practical and theoretical knowledge looks like, and how it \nis applied in the arena of educational change. The main purpose of the study is to \ndevelop an in depth understanding of the teachers' personal and professional stance \nwith regard to curriculum change in the classroom. Qualitative methods are \nemployed for exploring the teachers' perceptions of change. Interviews are used \nprimarily for data collection. The study indicates that the teachers deal with \nmultiple changes within commonly-defined elements of program. They approach \nchange through four dispositions or frames of mind: the procedural, practical, \npersonal and perceptional. A conceptual framework is developed that represents an \norganizer that is immediately applicable and relevant to the classroom. Implications \nfor teacher-practitioners are to build capacities for focussing on the manageable \naspects of change through the four dispositions. Theorists need to acknowledge an \nexpanded role for teachers as decision-makers, self-directed learners and leaders. \nTherefore, implications for the field include support through resource allocation, \npersonalization of staff development, flexibility of choice and structure, and \nintegration of theory with practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".