Une colère étudiante globale ? Analyse comparée des mouvements étudiants du Chili (2011), du Québec (2012) et de Hong-Kong (2014)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assiste-t-on à la montée d’une colère étudiante globale, née dans le sillage de politiques d’austérité et de réformes éducatives mondialisées ? Pour répondre, l’article s’appuie sur une comparaison des revendications portées au sein de trois mouvements étudiants post-2008 : celui de Santiago du Chili (2011-2012), le Printemps Érable à Montréal (2012) et la Révolution des Parapluies à Hong-Kong (2014). Le dispositif comparatif repose sur l’analyse statistique et qualitative des mots de la colère, c’est-à-dire des slogans, écrits, posters, recueillis de façon directe au sein de chacune des contestations (n=1100). La comparaison vise à identifier les différents répertoires mobilisés, mais aussi les problématiques communes entre ces trois mouvements. L’article montre qu’au-delà de leurs contrastes, les discours se rejoignent sur une même trame fondamentale articulant trois questions de fond, reliées entre elles : la valeur de l’éducation, l’injustice de la dette et le renouveau démocratique.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".