MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803864821

LES CONCEPTIONS ET LES RESPONSABILITÉS DES INTERVENANTS SCOLAIRES PAR RAPPORT À LA RÉUSSITE DES ÉLÈVES ET LE LEADERSHIP DES DIRECTIONS D’ÉTABLISSEMENT

2013· article· fr· W2803864821 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Pierre Lapointe, Emmanuel Poirel, André Brassard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Practices and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comme ce fut le cas ailleurs au Canada, le systeme public d’education du Quebec s’est vu dote d’un dispositif d’imputabilite visant l’amelioration de la reussite des eleves et comportant, entre autres, la production d’un plan de reussite par les etablissements et une reddition de comptes. Or, la mise en œuvre de ce dispositif dans les etablissements d’enseignement situes en milieu defavorise apparait plus ardue que dans d’autres milieux en raison de l’ampleur des problemes scolaires des eleves. Cette etude de cas illustre les difficultes rencontrees par une nouvelle direction d’etablissement intervenant dans un tel contexte. Elle met en relief les resistances du personnel enseignant aux changements preconises par la direction, notamment en ce qui concerne le plan de reussite propose. A des fins d’enseignement, elle fournit des elements de discussion sur les conceptions et les responsabilites des intervenants scolaires ainsi que sur l’exercice du leadership par les directions d’etablissement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0190.033
Scholarly communication0.0130.004
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.172
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.250 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and PolicySame topicEducational Practices and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207