L’efficacité de l’enseignement telle que perçue par des éducateurs physiques en formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le but de cette étude est de dégager, à partir des perceptions d’étudiants débutant un programme de formation professionnelle en activité physique, les facteurs qu’ils associent à un enseignement efficace. Quarante-sept personnes inscrites à un cours de pédagogie ont observé des séquences d’enseignement qu’elles ont analysées de façon subjective au début et à la fin du cours. L’analyse du contenu des réponses révèle que, dès le début de leur formation, les étudiants sont en mesure d’identifier des comportements et des attitudes d’enseignants qu’ils jugent plus ou moins appropriés, mais qu’ils sont relativement peu sensibles à ce que font les apprenants. À la fin du cours, ils décrivaient de façon plus spécifique certains aspects du comportement des intervenants et ils étaient plus sensibles aux variables associées au comportement 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".