MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128306784 · doi:10.7202/502005ar

Des stratégies pour favoriser le transfert des connaissances en écriture au collégial

2008· article· fr· W2128306784 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jean-Denis Moffet

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences de l éducation · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsCégep de Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Écrire exige le recours à plusieurs connaissances. Cette recherche a comme objectifs d'étudier comment s'effectue le transfert des connaissances en écriture et de vérifier quelles sont les stratégies les plus efficaces pour le favoriser. Deux stratégies d'utilisation du transfert, le transfert spontané et le transfert informé, ont été utilisées dans deux contextes différents, un contexte de transfert rapproché et un de transfert éloigné. L'analyse montre qu'une stratégie de transfert informé ne donne pas de résultats supérieurs à une stratégie de transfert spontané, tant dans un contexte de transfert rapproché que dans un contexte de transfert éloigné.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.440
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.036 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des sciences de l éducationSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207