MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025747533 · doi:10.7202/1069773ar

LE CONSEILLER PÉDAGOGIQUE EN TANT QU’AGENT DE CHANGEMENT : COMPÉTENCES ET LEADERSHIP TRANSFORMATIONNEL

2020· article· fr· W3025747533 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Claude Lachaîne, Claire Duchesne

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Teacher Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les conseillers pédagogiques participent à la mise en œuvre des orientations du ministère de l’Éducation et de celles de leur conseil ou commission scolaire en matière d’enseignement afin de répondre aux besoins d’innovation, de communication et de collaboration des apprenants du 21e siècle. Outre leurs connaissances pédagogiques, leur propension pour l’innovation et leurs habiletés relationnelles, ils sont peu préparés à exercer leur fonction d’agent de changement auprès de leurs collègues enseignants. Cet article fait état des résultats d’une recherche visant à comprendre de quelles façons se manifeste le leadership transformationnel de conseillers pédagogiques au regard de leur rôle d’agent de changement. Des entretiens semi-dirigés auprès de sept conseillers pédagogiques et de quatre directrices de services pédagogiques provenant de quatre conseils scolaires francophones de l’Ontario ont permis de dégager des liens entre les compétences qu’ils mobilisent pour guider les enseignants vers un changement de pratique et les manifestations du leadership transformationnel telles qu’élaborées par Bass (1998).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.673
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGillSame topicEducation and Teacher TrainingFrench-language works237,207