MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995311142 · doi:10.4000/dse.278

Modes d’articulation entre travail, recherche et formation. Entre meilleures pratiques et pratiques réflexives, peut-on orienter la formation vers le développement d’un métier ?

2013· article· fr· W1995311142 on OpenAlexaff
Audrey Gonin

Bibliographic record

VenueLes dossiers des sciences de l éducation · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)Université du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article s’intéresse à la question de l’articulation entre pratiques professionnelles, recherche et formation dans le champ de l’intervention sociale. Dans un premier temps, nous discutons trois modèles d’articulation de ces champs : le modèle des meilleures pratiques, celui des pratiques réflexives et celui du développement du métier. Dans un second temps, les rapports pratique/recherche/formation proposés par la perspective du développement du métier seront développés et illustrés par une recherche explorant les sens donnés au travail par des intervenant-e-s sociaux, et par un enseignement qui a été alimenté par les observations et analyses issues de cette recherche.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.006
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.567
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.039 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes dossiers des sciences de l éducationSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207