MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894667907 · doi:10.18162/fp.2018.457

Appréciations par les élèves de leur environnement socioéducatif et résultats aux épreuves externes communes en fin d’enseignement primaire : comparaison des établissements Freinet et traditionnels de l’enseignement communal liégeois

2018· article· fr· W2894667907 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFormation et profession · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Practices and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La controverse sur les avantages de la pdagogie Freinet perdure depuis des dcennies tant pour les valeurs ajoutes apportes en matire d' environnement socioducatif qu' en ce qui concerne les comptences scolaires acquises. Notre tude mene dans l' enseignement communal de la ville de Lige (Belgique) o plus de 1500 lves sont inscrits dans des tablissements Freinet (14 % de la population scolaire) montre que, niveau socioconomique quivalent, les lves de 3e cycle des tablissements Freinet obtiennent des niveaux de rsultats aux preuves communes de franais, mathmatiques et veil similaires ceux des coles traditionnelles, mais s' en distinguent par leurs dclarations systmatiquement plus positives en ce qui concerne leur environnement socioducatif.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.313 · 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