MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996992940 · doi:10.4000/questionsvives.509

Tutorat à distance et développement des compétences professionnelles des futurs enseignants d’anglais langue seconde

2010· article· fr· W1996992940 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mariane Gazaille

Bibliographic record

VenueQuestions vives recherches en éducation · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Tools and Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceSociologyHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

S’insérant au cœur du processus d’enseignement et définissant l’intervention éducative, l’enseignant joue un rôle crucial dans tout système d’éducation. La qualité de la formation des maîtres (FM) prend ici toute son importance en ce qu’elle vise à former des enseignants professionnels compétents. Pourtant, malgré la révision des programmes de FM, avance-t-on encore aujourd’hui que davantage pourrait être fait pour rapprocher théorie et pratique en FM. La présente étude vise à documenter cette question en s’intéressant aux effets d’un projet expérimental de tutorat inter-ordre2 à distance comme outil de formation pour les futurs enseignants de langues secondes. Les apprentissages rapportés sont classifiés puis comparés aux 12 compétences professionnelles (CP) qui orientent la FM au Québec (Canada). Les résultats suggèrent que le tutorat à distance permet le développement intégré de plusieurs composantes des CPs visées en FM et la conscientisation des futurs enseignants vis-à-vis de celles-ci.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuestions vives recherches en éducationSame topicEducational Tools and MethodsFrench-language works237,207