Conception, implantation et utilisation d’un portfolio professionnel étudiant dans un programme de formation en ergothérapie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente les résultats d’une recherche-action sur la conception, l’implantation et l’utilisation d’un portfolio professionnel étudiant au Programme d’ergothérapie de l’Université d’Ottawa. L’objectif du projet était de concevoir un outil andragogique structuré qui permettrait à l’étudiant de développer et d’intégrer les éléments témoignant de ses apprentissages et de sa maturation professionnelle. Les constats des concepteurs et les commentaires des 70 étudiants ayant utilisé le portfolio pendant une année scolaire sont présentés. La tenue du portfolio s’est avérée pertinente et utile, mais une attention particulière doit être portée à son appropriation par l’étudiant. Quelques pistes de réflexion sont proposées.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".