MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128711980 · doi:10.7202/1012905ar

C2i2e à distance : l’activité de l’étudiant est-elle représentative de son évaluation?

2012· article· fr· W2128711980 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alain Jaillet

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article rend compte d’une dynamique d’innovation consistant à mettre en oeuvre un dispositif de certification à distance pour de très grands effectifs. Destinée à des publics ayant pour l’essentiel expérimenté des dispositifs de formation classiques, cette solution est à même de traiter l’ensemble des participants à égalité de traitement, tout en gérant un dispositif pour de très grands effectifs. À partir de travaux sur l’étude des traces d’étudiants à distance, cet article tente de caractériser les éventuels croisements entre implication et performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.107
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.107
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0120.010
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.005

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.285 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaireSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207