Bibliographic record
Abstract
La Suisse romande a connu récemment une période d’intenses réformes scolaires. De nombreuses études et recherches avaient alimenté les réflexions et suscité un fort intérêt pour une mise en application des innovations dans les classes. Malgré l’enthousiasme de départ, les réformes se sont heurtées à des oppositions inattendues. Politiques, parents et enseignants ont manifesté des doutes et des critiques, souvent virulents, contre les changements entrepris. L’abandon des notes chiffrées, épiphénomène des projets de réforme, occupera sans partage le devant de la scène politique et médiatique et entraînera un retour à des pratiques plus traditionnelles. Le bilan proposé dans cet article décrit les intentions des mouvements de réforme, les différentes phases de leur mise en oeuvre et les effets connus sur les pratiques enseignantes. Il met en évidence la complexité de nos systèmes scolaires et ses contradictions, tout en relevant les apports positifs d’une période d’échanges et d’actions en vue d’améliorer l’école.
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 | 0.030 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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.
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".