MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124993438 · doi:10.7202/016117ar

Réflexions méthodologiques sur le leadership des femmes et des hommes en éducation

2007· article· fr· W2124993438 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lucie Héon, Claire Lapointe, Lyse Langlois

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches féministes · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophyExplicationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’étude du leadership en éducation fait face au défi de la qualité des designs méthodologiques retenus pour expliquer les différences entre les femmes et les hommes. Cet article met en évidence l’importance de retenir un design diversifié et de faire appel à un échantillon mixte composé d’un grand nombre de femmes et d’hommes. On y propose une piste intéressante : la méthode de la statistique textuelle et du logiciel Alceste appliquée aux discours de 21 directrices et de 26 directeurs d’école. Les résultats permettent de conclure à l’importance des facteurs contextuels et démographiques autres que le genre dans l’explication des différences entre le leadership des femmes et celui des hommes.

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 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)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.334
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.863
GPT teacher head0.564
Teacher spread0.299 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches féministesSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207