MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989600754 · doi:10.52358/mm.vi2.68

La Résolution collaborative de problèmes (RCP)

2019· article· fr· W2989600754 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Simon Jameson

Bibliographic record

VenueMédiations et médiatisations · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, nous présentons un bref portrait théorique et conceptuel de la résolution collaborative de problèmes dans le but de la rapprocher au numérique, qui s’avère être un outil de médiatisation majeur. Nous abordons les différents courants théoriques de la résolution de problèmes, passant de Polya à Jonassen, puis nous déclinons le concept de résolution collaborative de problèmes (RCP), importante composante des compétences du 21esiècle. Le numérique y est traité en sa qualité de vecteur d’apprentissages et de courroie de transmission pour la collaboration numérique. Ce portrait permet ainsi de mieux comprendre la symbiose entre le numérique et la RCP.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.357 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMédiations et médiatisationsSame topicInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsFrench-language works237,207