Différenciation pédagogique en éducation physique et à la santé auprès d’élèves ayant des difficultés motrices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette etude qualitative analyse les propos de 12 enseignants en education physique et a la sante (EPS) du primaire afin de comprendre les pratiques de differenciation pedagogique qu’ils emploient pour repondre aux besoins des eleves ayant des difficultes motrices sans handicap (DMSH). Les resultats montrent que les enseignants en EPS utilisent la differenciation pedagogique. Ils ajustent les processus d’enseignement et d’apprentissage, les productions et les contenus. Ils sont empathiques aux besoins affectifs des eleves ayant des DMSH et a l’environnement d’apprentissage qui les entoure. Toutefois, les resultats devoilent qu’ils se questionnent en ce qui concerne les mesures de soutien a offrir dans les situations d'evaluation visant a faire le bilan des competences de leurs eleves. Les enseignants cherchent a developper leurs competences afin d’adapter leurs interventions pour repondre aux besoins des eleves ayant des DMSH. L’etude met en lumiere les besoins des enseignants lies a la formation, aux modalites de soutien offerts dans leur milieu ainsi qu'a l’efficacite des outils d’intervention.
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 | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".