MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990008878 · doi:10.7202/1065164ar

Quel feedback les élèves du primaire en difficulté d’apprentissage reçoivent-ils dans leur bulletin scolaire ? Vers une typologie des commentaires laissés par leurs enseignants

2019· article· fr· W2990008878 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stéphane Colognesi, Catherine Van Nieuwenhoven

Bibliographic record

VenueMesure et évaluation en éducation · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStudent Assessment and Feedback
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La visée de cette contribution est de rendre compte d’une recherche qui a pour objectif d’apporter un éclairage sur la manière dont les enseignants novices du primaire formulent les commentaires écrits à destination des élèves en difficulté scolaire. Nous cherchons à voir si des enseignants débutants, qui ont suivi une formation actualisée à l’évaluation formative, utilisent aussi le bulletin dans une démarche formative dans laquelle l’apprenant est valorisé et qui s’inscrit dans une optique de régulation des apprentissages. Les commentaires laissés par les enseignants dans 27 bulletins ont été analysés et une typologie est proposée.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designObservational
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMesure et évaluation en éducationSame topicStudent Assessment and FeedbackFrench-language works237,207