MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100650015 · doi:10.7202/1005779ar

Le couplage entre pédagogie et technologies à l’université : cultures d’action et paradigmes de recherche

2011· article· fr· W2100650015 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInformation Technology and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malgré leurs avancées récentes, la pédagogie et ses technologies continuent à faire problème dans de nombreuses universités françaises, plus particulièrement en lettres et en sciences humaines. Dans une première partie, cette contribution aborde plusieurs facteurs pouvant expliquer le phénomène : culture académique traditionnelle qui fonde l’institution, statut de services auxiliaires couramment associé aux activités pédagogiques et techniques, et dépendance de ces dernières aux forces du marché et aux idéologies du moment. Une deuxième partie aborde l’impératif qui consiste, compte tenu des enjeux actuels, à développer un secteur de recherche à part entière, capable de produire les paradigmes d’analyse et les connaissances méthodiques indispensables à l’évolution des cultures d’action et à la structuration des pratiques institutionnelles 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.190 · 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