MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1481724777

Du CECR au développement professionnel : pour une démarche stratégique

2011· article· fr· W1481724777 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Language Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Le CECR apparait de prime abord comme un document assez « indigeste ». Etant le produit d’un compromis entre plusieurs traditions pédagogiques et cherchant à couvrir un grand nombre de domaines conceptuels qui se nourrissent de recherches assez disparates, il montre une complexité de structure et d’organisation qui peut s’avérer gênante pour nombre de praticiens. L’implémentation du CECR et les changements qu’il est amené à produire au niveau de l’enseignement/apprentissage des langues étrangères/secondes risquent par conséquent de ne pas être à la hauteur de son potentiel si les praticiens ne seront pas accompagnés dans leur capacité à s’approprier les concepts clés d’un tel document pour en faire des leviers d’innovation pédagogique. L’article relate du projet Encourager la culture de l’évaluation chez les professionnels (ECEP) du Centre européen de langues vivantes de Graz (émanation du Conseil de l’Europe) qui a abouti à la production d’outils spécifiques destinés aux formateurs d’enseignants, et aux enseignants, pour favoriser une telle appropriation. Abstract The CEFR looks at first sight as a rather heavy/tedious document. Being the result of a compromise between several pedagogic traditions, and aiming at encompassing a vast array of conceptual domains deriving from quite diverse research, it shows a structural as well as organisational complexity that can prove disturbing for many practitioners. Consequently, the implementation of the CEFR, and the changes this implies in second/foreign language teaching and learning, risk not to match its potential unless practitioners are supported in their capacity to grasp the key concepts of such a document and to allow it to play a pivotal role in pedagogic innovation. The article refers of the Encouraging the Culture of Evaluation among Practitioners project (ECEP) of the European Centre for Modern Languages (affiliated with the Council of Europe), which has produced specific tools for teacher educators, and teachers, able to facilitate such process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0060.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0820.000

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 head0.539
GPT teacher head0.588
Teacher spread0.049 · 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