Bibliographic record
Abstract
Devant de faibles résultats à diverses épreuves nationales et internationales, le ministère de l’Éducation du Nouveau-Brunswick a mis en place un plan d’amélioration intitulé Les enfants au premier plan . De nombreuses évaluations provinciales, en lecture, mathématiques et sciences, se rattachent à ce plan d’amélioration, et leurs résultats sont largement diffusés, dans les médias et en ligne. Dans cet article, nous posons un regard critique sur l’impact d’un accent mis sur les performances aux évaluations provinciales et nous interrogeons le contraste entre réussite scolaire et réussite éducative. D’abord, une étude de la situation alarmante dans laquelle se trouve le système scolaire francophone du Nouveau-Brunswick contextualise nos propos. Ensuite, nous explorons les impacts de ces nombreuses évaluations sur les acteurs du système. La pédagogie devient-elle plus transmissive et magistrale? Qu’en est-il de l’insécurité linguistique et de la menace du stéréotype? Enfin, quels sont les impacts sur la motivation des élèves ainsi que sur leurs buts d’apprentissage? En conclusion, nous explorons des solutions alternatives à la multiplication des évaluations.
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 | 0.014 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".