LE DÉVELOPPEMENT D’UNE COMPÉTENCE INTERCULTURELLE CHEZ DES ÉDUCATRICES EN MILIEU DE GARDE ÉDUCATIF PLURIETHNIQUE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente une étude réalisée auprès d’éducatrices travaillant dans un centre de la petite enfance pluriethnique de Montréal. L’objectif de cette étude est d’examiner comment s’est développée la compétence interculturelle suite à la formation continue reçue en milieu de travail instaurée par l’entremise d’un groupe de discussion en partenariat avec une chercheuse universitaire. Se référant au cadre de Deardorff (2004, 2006), les résultats montrent que le groupe de discussion a fait émerger plusieurs composantes de la compétence interculturelle situées au niveau inférieur (attitudes, aptitudes, connaissances et compréhensions) ayant contribué à des changements de cadres de référence requis au niveau supérieur et permettant l’actualisation de la compétence interculturelle. Une méthodologie qualitative sous-tendant un paradigme interprétatif est choisie pour atteindre l’objectif de recherche.
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 | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".