MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

L’Approche par compétences (APC) en formation des maîtres: Analyse documentaire et critique

2022· article· fr· W1602079852 on OpenAlexaff
François Guillemette, Clermont Gauthier

Bibliographic record

VenueÉduquer · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicCompetency Development and Evaluation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans la grande majorité des programmes post-secondaires de formation des maîtres dans le monde occidental, on retrouve une orientation appelée « approche par compétences » (APC). Dans la recherche dont cet article présente les résultats, nous avons voulu, par une recension des écrits, retracer l’évolution historique de cette approche. Le corpus des écrits analysés rassemble plus de 1100 documents et est constitué principalement de textes contenant un discours argumentatif faisant la promotion...

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.346 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉduquerSame topicCompetency Development and EvaluationFrench-language works237,207