Enseigner la danse à l’école secondaire : lier la théorie et la pratique d’éducation esthétique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article tente de dégager les objectifs sur le terrain et les stratégies pédagogiques de deux enseignantes de danse oeuvrant au secondaire. Cette analyse de cas a fait ressortir « l'acquisition de capacités d'appréciation chorégraphique » comme l'un des cinq grands thèmes d'enseignement de la classe de danse. La description des stratégies pédagogiques déployées pour l'atteinte des sous-objectifs centraux et des sous-objectifs complémentaires a permis la mise au jour des détails événementiels en rapport avec les occasions d'apprentissage esthétiques offertes. La mise en relation de ces connaissances du terrain de l'enseignement avec les propositions théoriques disponibles en éducation esthétique met en évidence des liens et des ruptures entre la théorie et la pratique de l'éducation esthétique en classe de danse scolaire.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".