Les gestes évaluatifs de l’enseignant dans une tâche de correction collective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La correction collective est une pratique évaluative commune dans le quotidien d’une classe de cycle 3. Elle est, à ce titre, rarement remise en question par les enseignants qui y ont recours, et elle obéit la plupart du temps à des routines qui en conditionnent le déroulement. Or, les séances correctives importent du point de vue de la qualité de la régulation des apprentissages. L’agir professionnel de l’enseignant et, en particulier, ses gestes évaluatifs déterminent l’entrée des élèves dans de tels processus. Si de nombreuses recherches ont mis en évidence l’impor - tance des processus de rétroaction dans l’apprentissage, il reste que la mise en oeuvre de ceux-ci est encore peu documentée. La présente recherche vise à dis - tinguer et à caractériser les gestes évaluatifs de l’enseignant en situation corrective ainsi que leurs incidences sur la posture des apprenants.
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 | 0.052 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".