Représentations professionnelles des enseignants d’éducation physique envers l’inclusion des élèves en situation de handicap
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce travail entreprend de recenser systématiquement puis d’analyser qualitativement l’ensemble des articles internationaux (en français et en anglais), publiés entre 1975 et 2015, relatifs aux représentations professionnelles des enseignants d’éducation physique sur la question vive qu’est l’inclusion des élèves en situation de handicap. Trente-cinq études ont été sélectionnées et réparties autour de trois thèmes associés aux représentations professionnelles des enseignants sous la forme d’obstacles à l’inclusion : 1) l’inadéquation entre les politiques inclusives et les programmes d’éducation physique, 2) la difficile collaboration entre les enseignants d’éducation physique et les partenaires de l’inclusion et 3) l’inadaptation de la formation initiale et continue des enseignants en éducation physique adaptée. Une des retombées de ce travail consiste à proposer des perspectives de formation pour les enseignants d’éducation physique afin de franchir ces obstacles.
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 | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".