Le « spirituel » en éducation : une conceptualisation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis 2000, l’école publique québécoise est laïque et la loi affirme que son rôle est, entre autres, de « faciliter le cheminement spirituel de chaque élève afin de favoriser son épanouissement » (Loi sur l’instruction publique [LIP], 2019, art. 36). Chaque élève a le droit de bénéficier d’un service éducatif complémentaire assumé par des intervenants : les animateurs de vie spirituelle et d’engagement communautaire (AVSEC). Leurs activités sont laïques et destinées à tous les élèves. À partir d’une analyse par théorisation ancrée des récits de pratique de 12 AVSEC, nous avons élaboré un modèle typologique du spirituel tel que pratiqué par ces AVSEC. \n \nThe Quebec public school system has been secular since 2000 and the Education Act states that its role is to “facilitate the spiritual development of students so as to promote self-fulfilment” (EA, 2019, art. 36). Moreover, every student has the right to benefit from a complementary educational service whose facilitators are called animators of spiritual care and guidance and community involvement (ASCGCI). ASCGCI’s activities are secular and intended for all students. Based on an analysis of the grounded theory of 12 ASCGCI practise narratives, we developed a typological model of the spiritual as practised by these ASCGCIs.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".