Valeurs éducatives des enseignants: Comparaison entre les milieux alternatifs et reguliers au lendemain de la reforme quebecoise de l’education de 1997
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Building on the findings of Cormier, Lessard, Valois and Toupin (1981), which showed teachers’ diverse perspectives on education, the objective of this study is to determine whether teachers who work in alternative or regular school setting have different values regarding education. The study Questionnaire de Valeurs en Education (Perron, 1981a) was administered to 88 teachers in Greater Montreal working in alternative public schools and regular public schools at both elementary and secondary levels. The results show that alternative school teachers place greater emphasis on participation and student freedom (i.e., self-esteem, freedom for students to self- direct their learning), while those in regular schools place greater value on maintaining consistency and predictability in their teaching (i.e., classroom structure, tasks organization, etc.). The results show that high school teachers placed more value on security aspects such as classroom structure, tasks organization, etc. than primary teachers. Despite the 1997 educational reform that has made alternative and regular schools more similar by promoting the values associated with the alternative model, this study finds that teachers working in different settings do not have the same values. The implications for students is discussed. Keywords: values, teachers, alternative school, regular schools, education
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".