MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1543561639 · doi:10.4000/dms.186

De la métis au e-learning : la médiation du rapport au savoir

2013· article· fr· W1543561639 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Caroline Djambian, Serge Agostinelli

Bibliographic record

VenueDistances et médiations des savoirs · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyPsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En tant qu’enseignants, nous cherchons à transmettre des savoirs et à faire de nos étudiants des personnes qualifiées, dotées de compétences professionnelles spécifiques à leur futur métier. La transmission du savoir s’est traditionnellement faite par une longue période d’apprentissage au contact des pairs, mais les situations actuelles de formation et de travail changent, se dirigeant vers des environnements toujours plus médiatés. Dans cet article, nous exposons les notions clés touchant à la formation à une profession et à son exercice. Cela nous porte à nous interroger sur la manière dont s’intègre aujourd’hui la dimension expérientielle dans l’acquisition de la compétence. Pour répondre à cette question, nous analysons deux études de cas relevant de situations d’enseignement médiaté par les technologies de l’information et de la communication, l’une dans le milieu universitaire, l’autre dans le milieu industriel, plus spécifiquement dans l’ingénierie nucléaire d’Électricité de France (EDF). Elles démontrent que le travail intellectualisé fait aujourd’hui appel à des capacités subjectives et cognitives qui trouvent leur accomplissement dans des pratiques sociales de réseaux.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0120.011
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDistances et médiations des savoirsSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207