Analyse des caractéristiques du contexte éducatif qui favorisent le développement d’attitudes de leadership1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette recherche se propose d’analyser l'effet de la perception des contextes éducatifs de la classe et de la troupe scoute sur les attitudes et capacités de leadership (value-based leadership) des adolescents de 15 et 16 ans. L'étude a été menée sur un échantillon de jugement, composé de 600 élèves et 231 Scouts inscrits en 4eet 5esecondaire à Rome. Les instruments utilisés sontl’Educational context perception questionnaire -ECPQ, et laSocially responsible leadership scale-SRLSà laquelle a été ajoutée une échelle de Capacités de leadership. Les analyses confirment l'hypothèse que le contexte éducatif a un impact sur le développement du leadership des adolescents. Cet article décrit les résultats en termes de leadership, de perception du groupe classe et scout et d’impact du contexte éducatif sur les attitudes et capacités de leadership. Les différences liées au genre, au fait d’assumer ou non des responsabilités au sein de l’établissement scolaire, d’aimer ou non l’école, d’être perçu comme un bon ou mauvais élève, sont aussi présentées.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".