Formations et compétences dans les métiers de contact direct avec les petits enfants : quelques enjeux, conflits et paradoxes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La question des compétences des agents au contact direct de la petite enfance est analysée au travers d'un riche recueil de données empiriques. La question des compétences, maniée essentiellement par les formateurs spécialisés, qui élaborent des référentiels pour l'instant peu stabilisés et dans un cadre de pénurie relative, conduit à un double paradoxe : pousser à la professionnalisation des personnels permet de maintenir les personnels à statut à l'abri du contact direct et continu des jeunes enfants, et dans le même moment de laisser dans l'indécision la question du statut des personnes les moins qualifiées qui, elles, assurent au quotidien ce contact. La rhétorique de la compétence masque bien souvent des hiérarchisations fondées à la fois sur des réflexes corporatistes et sur des logiques gestionnaires.
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 | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".