Critique des fondements et usages de l’écosystémie dans le domaine du partenariat école-famille-communauté : application d’une perspective contextuelle et socioculturelle dans le cadre du programme Famille, école, communauté, réussir ensemble
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article s’inscrit au coeur du débat sur la nature du partenariat école-famille-communauté et sur ses logiques sous-jacentes. Nous y contribuons en questionnant les fondements et les usages de l’écosystémie qui est, en principe, à la base des pratiques collaboratives et de l’engagement parental. En situant l’écosystémie au regard de la notion de métathéorie, nous inscrirons les pratiques collaboratives sur un continuum qui reflète la nature et le degré d’interaction entre les acteurs. Nous prenons position au chapitre du partenariat école-famille-communauté en adoptant une perspective écosystémique d’orientations contextuelle et socioculturelle. Nous nous appuierons sur le programmeFamille, école, communauté, réussir ensemble(FECRE), mis en oeuvre au Québec entre 2002 et 2009, pour illustrer l’actualisation d’une telle logique écosystémique dans le cadre de pratiques collaboratives ainsi que de l’engagement parental.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".