L’intervention éducative, un construit théorique pour analyser les pratiques d’enseignement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article présente les deux concepts centraux du cadre conceptuel mis en oeuvre pour analyser les pratiques d’enseignement en contexte et dans leur complexité, les concepts d’intervention éducative et de médiation. Il rappelle, dans un premier temps, les motifs qui ont conduit au choix de l’expression « intervention éducative ». Dans un deuxième temps, nous distinguons entre la perspective empirique, opérationnelle et pragmatique qui caractérise dans l’usage cette expression et son appréhension en tant que construit théorique, particulièrement en soulignant les différents attributs. Enfin, dans un troisième temps, le concept de médiation est présenté, d’une part, à partir de sa spécificité historicosociale et dialectique dans tout processus d’objectivation, d’autre part, en établissant la distinction complémentaire entre la médiation cognitive relevant du sujet apprenant et la médiation pédagogicodidactique relevant de l’enseignant.
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 | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".