Avantages et limites des approches méthodologiques utilisées pour étudier les pratiques enseignantes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans les recherches en sciences de l’éducation, les pratiques enseignantes semblent être de plus en plus choisies comme objet d’investigation. Or, ces pratiques peuvent être examinées au moyen de différentes approches méthodologiques (Bru, 2002a). À partir des écrits sur ce sujet, nous proposons une synthèse des avantages et des limites des approches méthodologiques qui paraissent être les plus souvent utilisées pour étudier les pratiques enseignantes. Dans cette optique, nous avons regroupé ces approches en trois grandes familles en fonction de leur visée : les approches à visée prescriptive, les approches à visée heuristique et les approches à visée pratique.
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 | 0.257 | 0.533 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".