Le transfert des apprentissages et la réforme de l’éducation au Québec : quelques mises au point
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’objectif du présent article est d’examiner le discours de certains pédagogues de langue française concernant la notion de transfert et de faire la démonstration que la conception véhiculée par ces auteurs est, à plusieurs égards, contraire aux données issues des recherches en psychologie. Il en ressort que ces auteurs restreignent souvent la définition du transfert à ses formes les plus improbables et négligent, dans leurs propositions de réforme des pratiques d’enseignement, deux autres paramètres liés à l’existence du transfert : l’acquisition et la rétention des apprentissages. En véhiculant des conceptions erronées et en négligeant l’existence du phénomène de transfert vertical, ces auteurs proposent des pratiques pédagogiques qui favorisent les meilleurs élèves au détriment de ceux éprouvant des difficultés.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".