Traces de la formation des enseignants sur la transformation du rapport à l’écrit d’étudiants québécois
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’écriture, grâce à sa fonction épistémique, joue un rôle essentiel dans l’apprentissage: elle permet de mettre la pensée à distance pour mieux l’examiner, l’élaborer, la structurer, la critiquer (GOODY, 1979), favorisant ainsi l’appropriation de la connaissance et la construction des savoirs (BARRÉ-DE MINIAC et REUTER, 2006; CHABANNE et BUCHETON, 2002; SCHNEUWLY, 1995, 2008). Cet article rend compte de la transformation du rapport à l’écrit de deux groupes d’étudiants en formation des maitres de l’Université de Sherbrooke, aux programmes d’enseignement professionnel et d’enseignement secondaire. Les données recueillies par entrevues semi-dirigées ont mis en évidence des éléments de leur programme d’étude ayant joué un rôle dans cette transformation, mais également des traces de leur histoire scolaire dans celle-ci, en particulier en ce qui concerne les étudiants d’enseignement professionnel.
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 | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
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".