MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613928523 · doi:10.2307/20054206

L'importance de l'interactivité éducative dans les Discussions Synchrones Numériques

2006· article· fr· W2613928523 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

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Tools and Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesDistance educationSociologyArtPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Apres avoir repose le cadre de l ʹ apprentissage par probleme dans l ʹ enseignement a distance, cette contribution etudie le poids relatif de chacun des profils etudiants (n=61) et enseignants (n= 49) dans l ʹ interactivite necessaire au processus d ʹ apprentissage dans trois formations. Si, a l ʹ inverse des solutions classiques d ʹ enseignement, la participation des etudiants est tres importante, on releve de nettes differences en fonction des formations. La distance et l ʹ usage de la technologie, favorisent une interactivite ecrale dans laquelle on va neanmoins reperer une structure differente en terme quantitatif selon que l ʹ on est tuteur ou etudiant. Si les enseignants sont fortement presents, les etudiants ne le sont pas moins et l ʹ observation laisse supposer que l ʹ inspiration socioconstructiviste de ces dispositifs semble se manifester par la forte interactivite entre etudiants. L ʹ etude se concentre sur les donnees objectives de trois formations differentes, enregistrees par le systeme informatique UNIV ‐ RCT. Mots cles : enseignement a distance, interactivite, tutorat, participation etudiante, discussion synchrone numerique. After defining the scope of problem ‐ based learning in distance learning, this contribution studies the relative weight of each student profile (n=61) and teachers (n=49) in the interaction necessary to the learning process. While students’ participation is considerable compared to classical teaching solutions, significant discrepancies can be reported according to the considered training. Distance and the use of technology favour a “screenal” (spoken writing via a screen) interactivity in which a different structure can however be identified in quantitative terms according to the status of the participant (tutor or student). Teachers are stongly involved, but so are students and we can assume through our observations that the socio ‐ constructivist inspiration of these solutions seem to express itself in the strong interactivity between students. The study focuses on the objective data gathered from 3 different trainings, stored by the computing system UNIV ‐ RCT. Keywords: distance learning, interactivity, tutoring, student participation, digital synchronous discussion

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.352
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