MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271106302 · doi:10.18162/ritpu.2006.118

Communauté d’apprentissage et communauté de pratique en ligne : le processus réflexif dans la formation des formateurs

2006· article· fr· W2271106302 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue internationale des technologies en pédagogie universitaire · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Tools and Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Saisissant l'occasion offerte par de rcentes politiques ducatives qui orientent la formation des enseignants vers le travail collectif en rseaux, nous abordons ici la dlicate question de l'association entre pratique rflexive et participation des communauts de pratique en ligne. Motivs par le dveloppement professionnel de l'enseignant, nous montrons l'intrt de concevoir des formations qui ont pour enjeux d'tre un terreau favorisant l'mergence de communauts de pratique en ligne et d'ouvrir les praticiens de nouvelles postures pdagogiques. Nous prsentons un paradigme qui articule quatre notions : rflexion sur les pratiques, cadre dialogique pour le processus rflexif, communaut d'apprentissage et communaut de pratique. Nous dcrivons un dispositif de travail rflexif intgr au sein d'une formation collaborative avec ses supports d'expression, son scnario et son processus dialogique. L'ensemble est illustr par une tude de cas portant sur une formation de formateurs qui s'est rpte sur deux annes conscutives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.296 · 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