Traduire la recherche en pratiques : vers un acte de transformation et d’engagement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En s’inspirant des travaux issus de la philosophie de l’éducation et en adoptant une perspective empruntée à la philosophie du langage, cet essai tente de se distancier des conceptions habituellement retenues pour discuter la traduction de la recherche en pratiques en éducation. Après avoir brièvement présenté un modèle de la traduction comme acte de transformation et d’engagement, il examine la fertilité de ce modèle au regard des travaux de Paul Standish sur la justice sociale. Puis, à partir de ce modèle, il examine un débat important des sciences de l’éducation: la question du rapport entre la recherche et la pratique. Enfin, il présente deux questions soulevées par ce modèle, d’abord la question des critères qui permettent de juger les qualités et la pertinence de la recherche, puis la question des interfaces de traduction. Ce faisant, il dégage quelques implications pour l’enseignement, la recherche en éducation ainsi que la formation des maîtres.
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 | 0.075 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.108 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.033 | 0.038 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| 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; 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".