À l’école du droit : les apports de la méthode ethnographique à l’analyse de la formation juridique
Classification
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".
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article qui suit présente les résultats d’une enquête par observation dans les cursus juridiques de deux institutions élitaires françaises, l’Institut d’études politiques de Paris (Sciences Po) et l’École des hautes études commerciales (HEC Paris). Associant une réflexion générale sur la formation au droit des élites et une démarche méthodologique originale appliquant l’ethnographie à l’analyse de l’enseignement juridique, ce travail met en évidence les grandes orientations, théoriques, pratiques et pédagogiques, qui se dégagent de ces enseignements. Montrant que cette socialisation scolaire intègre un processus d’acculturation normative, en l’occurrence à l’idéologie capitaliste, par l’entremise du droit économique et la figure des avocats d’affaires, les auteures souhaitent contribuer à une meilleure connaissance de l’enseignement du droit « en action ».
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 | 0.011 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it