MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1573276768 · doi:10.3917/trav.007.0147

« On est là toutes seules »

2002· article· fr· W1573276768 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karen Messing, Ana María Seifert

Bibliographic record

VenueTravailler · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Le système québécois d’éducation des adultes reçoit des étudiants qui ont abandonné le système régulier et des immigrés. Les politiques gouvernementales changent constamment, incitant le gouvernement à engager 90 % des enseignants sur des contrats à court terme. La population enseignante est composée à 73 % de femmes, concentrées dans les cours élémentaires de français. Par Suite d’une demande de la Centrale des syndicats du Québec, nous avons effectué une analyse de ce travail en milieu urbain. Les enseignantes font face à une population étudiante ayant de graves problèmes économiques, sociaux et académiques. Elles déploient diverses stratégies pour encourager les étudiants tout en conservant leur rapport d’autorité. Ce rapport, déjà fragile puisqu’il s’agit de femmes qui se trouvent en position d’autorité, se trouve compliqué par leur statut précaire. Les collègues, source potentielle d’appui, de savoir-faire, de confort et de solidarité, sont souvent objectivement en compétition. Les conditions de travail dans ce secteur empêchent le développement d’un support familial. Ainsi, le statut précaire des enseignantes nuit à l’exercice de ce métier.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.007
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.005

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 head0.287
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.136 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTravaillerSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207