MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055227120 · doi:10.4000/vertigo.1968

La gestion de l’eau et l’éducation environnementale dans les documents pédagogiques au Burkina Faso

2003· article· fr· W2055227120 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Binto Ouedraogo

Bibliographic record

VenueVertigO · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Burkina Faso, pays sahélien, à l’instar des autres pays est confronté à des problèmes de développement liés à des conséquences écologiques sérieuses : l’appauvrissement de la couche d’ozone, les changements climatiques, la dégradation des sols, le déboisement, … Face à tous ces aléas, le gouvernement a pris des mesures institutionnelles en faveur de la protection de l’environnement : la prise de six engagements nationaux dont "une école un bosquet", l’adoption d’un code de l’environnement, l’adoption d’une stratégie nationale d’éducation environnementale qui prend en compte tous les ordres d’enseignement au niveau du formel comme du non formel. En effet, sans un environnement propice aucun développement durable n’est possible. Dans cette lutte pour un environnement favorable, le gouvernement est appuyé par des Institutions internationales telles que l’UNICEF, des organisations non gouvernementales (ONG) et autres associations : Helen Keller International, Amicale des Forestiers du Burkina, Green Cross, …La présente communication essaie de faire le point sur l’éducation à l’environnement et à la gestion de l’eau selon les documents pédagogiques conçus au Burkina et des actions de l’UNICEF et ses partenaires dans le domaine.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.009
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVertigOSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207