MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154487333 · doi:10.7202/1008988ar

Ressources professionnelles du superviseur de stage : une étude exploratoire

2012· article· fr· W2154487333 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Enrique Correa Molina

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences de l éducation · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Notre étude explore les ressources mobilisées par le superviseur de stage lors d’entretiens post-observation en classe. L’approche de l’argumentation pratique (Fenstermacher, 1996) a été utilisée pour interviewer un groupe de superviseurs d’expérience sur la base de l’enregistrement d’une rencontre post-observation en classe avec un stagiaire. Ce texte met en évidence la prédominance de certaines des ressources mobilisées par les superviseurs de stage. Nous discutons de ces résultats en tenant compte de compétences qu’un formateur est censé manifester.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.396
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.085 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des sciences de l éducationSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207