MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nested Within or Swallowed Up: Le dilemme des chercheurs francophones en pédagogie postsecondaire au Canada

2017· article· fr· W2707670336 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Geneviève Maheux-Pelletier, Vanessa Rukholm, Jovan Groen, Nancy Vézina

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La littérature dans le domaine de la recherche en pédagogie postsecondaire (RePP) a pris une expansion importante au cours des dernières décennies, particulièrement dans les espaces anglophones tels que l’Amérique du Nord, l’Europe de l’Ouest et l’Australie. Bien que cette expansion des idées reliées à la RePP puisse être également présente dans les communautés francophones, cela ne semble pas se traduire dans la nature et le nombre de publications dans le domaine en français et dans les expériences vécues par des chercheurs du domaine issus de diverses communautés francophones et bilingues. Cet article met en lumière plusieurs enjeux pertinents qui influencent la diffusion de la RePP en français, qui pour les auteurs représente la dimension savante des décisions pédagogiques que prend l’enseignant au postsecondaire. Initié par une analyse des récits personnels partagés par chaque auteur, deux thèmes principaux seront abordés. D’abord, les différentes définitions de la RePP selon ses influences géographiques, culturelles et sa prévalence au sein de la communauté de recherche et de pratique anglophone ; et deuxièmement, l’accès limité à des espaces pour la publication, et conséquemment à un auditoire limité, auquel font face les chercheurs francophones en RePP (Loiola et Romainville, 2008; Rege Colet et al., 2011). En établissant des liens entre ces aspects et ceux issus d’autres groupes minoritaires impliqués dans des activités de RePP, l’article se veut un catalyseur renouvelé pour échanger et générer des idées pour mettre en œuvre des actions visant une meilleure intégration au sein et au-delà des communautés francophones et bilingues des voix qui s’identifient à la RePP mais qui restent à ce jour marginalisées. En conclusion, les auteurs encouragent une mobilisation accrue et un rayonnement de la recherche en pédagogie postsecondaire effectuée en français. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) literature has certainly seen significant expansion over the last few decades, particularly in Anglophone spheres such as North America, Western Europe, and Australia. While this expansion may well be true in the practice of SoTL related ideas in francophone communities, it is not reflected in the nature and extent of publications related to SoTL in French and the experiences of SoTL scholars from diverse francophone and bilingual communities. This article unveils several pertinent issues that influence the practice, and more specifically the dissemination of SoTL in French. Initiated by an analysis of narratives contributed by each author, two overarching themes are discussed. Firstly, differing definitions of SoTL as influenced by geography, culture, and prevalence within the Anglophone research and practice communities; and secondly, the limited access to outlets of publication, and consequently limited readership and citation, that francophone and bilingual scholars of SoTL face (Loiola et Romainville, 2008; Rege Colet, McAlpine, Fanghanel et Weston, 2011). By aligning these issues with those of other SoTL minority groups the article seeks to serve as a renewed catalyst for discussion and brainstorming around the actions within and beyond francophone and bilingual communities to encourage increased engagement in, and reach for, SoTL in French.

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 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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.105
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.105
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0570.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.008
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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and LearningSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207