MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132992901

Re-visioning staff development for K--6 French immersion teachers: a case study of a professional learning community

2004· dissertation· W7132992901 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stefanie Muhling

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2004
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional developmentProfessional learning communityImmersion (mathematics)French immersionContinuing professional developmentSchool teachersFaculty developmentDevelopment plan
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present case study examines the inception, development and achievements of a professional learning community (PLC) comprised of French immersion teachers working in three schools, located in a large urban school board in Ontario. Professional learning communities represent a new wave of staff development, founded upon the principle that professional development is most effective when it is school-based, sustained and collaborative rather that centralized, ad hoc and didactic. The PLC presented in this study, was established in 2000, and is among the first of its kind within the school district. The fact that the school board has pioneered this staff development model with French immersion teachers is of particular interest, given the well-documented history of inadequacy of pre-service and in-service preparation opportunities for immersion teachers. In the final chapter, the information acquired through this investigation has been applied to present a plan for future creation of similar learning communities.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.312 · 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicTeacher Education and Leadership Studies→French-language works237,207→