MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1973491041 · doi:10.7202/901375ar

Les activités de l’équipe de gestion dans les écoles polyvalentes

2009· article· fr· W1973491041 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Paul Laurin

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences de l éducation · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article a pour but de présenter la description des emplois administratifs de l’équipe de gestion dans les écoles polyvalentes du niveau secondaire de la province de Québec. On y trouve la description de l’administration considérée comme un système, les attributions de l’administration de l’éducation et l’équipe administrative d’une école secondaire. La méthodologie utilisée : un questionnaire administré dans 26 écoles secondaires de la province de Québec. Les résultats semblent se justifier sous trois aspects de la définition des emplois : 1) les tâches communes et particulières; 2) les relations entre les diverses attributions; 3) les relations entre les différents postes administratifs. Les résultats obtenus sont expliqués en détail. En conclusion il ressort que certaines équipes de gestions ont tendance à travailler collectivement sur les mêmes tâches, alors que dans d’autres équipes les membres ont tendance à accomplir d’une façon isolée les différentes tâches. Cependant avant de préconiser un type de fonctionnement plutôt qu’un autre, il serait important de rechercher quel est le type d’équipe de gestion qui obtient une plus grande efficacité au sein de l’organisation.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.424
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.023 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des sciences de l éducation→Same topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→