Entre métropole et régions, un même raisonnement peut-il soutenir un choix de modèles de services différent pour l'intégration des élèves allophones ? Between Metropolis and Outlying Regions: Can the Same Rational Sustain a Different Choice of Models of Services for the Integration of Allophone Pupils?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many countries, schools are confronted with the major challenge of integrating children who have recently arrived in the country or who have an immigrant background. At the heart of this challenge, is the issue of choosing the appropriate model of services offered to pupils for whom the heritage language is different from the language of the receiving institution. The goal of this article is to present results of an inquiry concerning models of services operating within the Quebec public schools located in the Greater Montreal Area, Quebec City, as well as in certain outlying regions of the province. Furthermore, this article provides an account of the way that, in an effort to ensure successful integration, actors from different school environments offer distinct models of services, but nonetheless similar arguments, to support their choices.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".