MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982030723 · doi:10.7202/1065662ar

ENJEUX DE COLLABORATION ENTOURANT LE PLAN D’ENSEIGNEMENT INDIVIDUALISÉ. ENTRE PROCESSUS D’INCLUSION ET D’EXCLUSION

2019· article· fr· W2982030723 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nathalie Bélanger, Joannie St-Pierre

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyInclusion (mineral)PhilosophySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les rôles des acteurs engagés dans la préparation et l’implantation de plans d’enseignement individualisé sont examinés. Ces plans sont considérés en tant que dispositifs qui organisent des rapports sociaux entre les acteurs scolaires et communautaires. Une revue de la littérature menée à partir de moteurs de recherche et de critères précis permet de discuter des rôles des acteurs et de leur collaboration en lien aux orientations inclusives plus récemment adoptées et des possibles effets d’exclusion.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.274
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGillSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207