La formation d’enseignants en art dramatique : dynamique entre la théorie et la pratique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article s'organise autour de la planification d'un programme en éducation s'adressant aux futurs enseignants spécialistes en art dramatique au niveau secondaire. Ce programme, mis sur pied en Angleterre, a évolué sur une période d'environ dix-huit ans. Les leçons, tirées de cette évolution, indiquent qu'en plus d'avoir répondu aux attentes du gouvernement, les promoteurs et les participants ont réussi une certaine mise à distance de la pratique; par exemple, le programme est passé de la formation de l'enseignant à l'entraînement de l'enseignant. Cet article porte sur le rapport théorie et pratique que nous avons maintenu dans le programme et sur le choix des théories retenues pour en conserver la souplesse. Un schéma détaillé du programme permet d'en observer le contenu ainsi que les méthodes d'enseignement choisies.
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 | 0.010 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".