Analyse du cheminement qui a mené des enseignants du primaire à développer une utilisation exemplaire des technologies de l'information et de la communication en classe.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this multicase study (Merriam, 1988) is to analyze the journey that lead elementary school teachers to become exemplary technology-integrators in their classrooms. An on-line questionnaire, an interview, classroom observations and a week-long summary of technology use ensured that the seven subjects selected were exemplary technology-integrators, that is, teachers that use technology for their own personal, professional and pedagogical needs, and engaged their students frequently and regularly in activities that developed disciplinary and cross-curricular competencies through the use of ICT. These teachers worked in five different school boards, all located near Montreal (Quebec, Canada) and taught at all elementary levels. They also participated in two or three additional semi-structured interviews and a focus group. Their principal, as well as their spouse, were also interviewed in order to triangulate the data. <br />A content analysis (Van der Maren, 1995), using N'Vivo software, allowed to first trace an individual profile of each case, and then, to compare the different cases. At a scientific level, the research offers four major findings : 1) definitions of important concepts ; 2) a non-linear, cyclical model of the ICT integration process ; 3) roles adopted by teachers as they become exemplary technology-integrators ; and 4) a new light on to some well-documented and some less or not documented factors that influenced the ICT integration process. At a more pragmatic level, these results can help orient the decisions of government, organisations, resource persons and administrators who promote and facilitate integration of technology in schools. Inspite of the fact that the results of this research have some limitations in terms of generalization due to the research design chosen, they bring an extensive and comprehensive view of the ICT integration process by elementary school teachers. The research also suggested many questions to pursue research in this area.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".