MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2246783051

L’utilisation de modèles d’enseignement en stage par des futurs enseignants

2015· article· fr· W2246783051 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Tools and Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article présente les résultats d'une étude exploratoire dressant un portrait des modèles d’enseignement utilisés dans un contexte de stage par 93 futurs enseignants de 4e année du baccalauréat en éducation préscolaire et en enseignement primaire. L’analyse des réponses obtenues à un questionnaire a permis de démontrer que outre l’enseignement magistral qui est utilisé très souvent en stage, les modèles d’enseignement les plus utilisés par les stagiaires en ordre d’importance sont l’enseignement et l’apprentissage stratégiques et l’apprentissage coopératif. Le peu de familiarisation des futurs enseignants avec les différents modèles d’enseignement durant leur parcours d’apprenants, ainsi que le souci de la réussite de leur stage semblent encourager les futurs enseignants à privilégier une modalité traditionnelle de transmission des contenus.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.564
GPT teacher head0.613
Teacher spread0.049 · 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