Portrait du développement professionnel d’éducateurs physiques au regard de leurs compétences en enseignement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pour s’adapter aux changements survenus dans les systemes scolaires canadiens au cours des deux dernieres decennies, les educateurs physiques doivent developper une diversite de competences professionnelles. Les dispositifs de developpement professionnel mis en place ne semblent toutefois pas repondre aux principaux besoins de formation de ces derniers relativement au developpement de certaines de ces competences (Armour et Yelling, 2007). L’objectif de la presente etude est de dresser le portrait du developpement professionnel d’educateurs physiques canadiens au regard de leur degre de maitrise des competences professionnelles en enseignement. Pour ce faire, un questionnaire a ete complete par 73 educateurs physiques canadiens. Le traitement des donnees s’est fait a l’aide de statistiques descriptives et de tests non parametriques. Les resultats obtenus indiquent qu’il semble y avoir une dissonance entre les besoins des educateurs physiques canadiens en matiere de developpement de competences professionnelles et les activites de formation continue qui leur sont proposees.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".