MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115189345 · doi:10.17118/11143/17841

Sur quelques principes d’argumentation néolibérale dans l’enseignement du français en Acadie

2020· article· fr· W3115189345 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Samuel Vernet

Bibliographic record

VenueCircula · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesFrenchSociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article propose quelques réflexions sur l’influence d’un cadre idéologique néolibéral sur l’enseignement du français en Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick, région francophone minoritaire du Canada. Il s’appuie sur une enquête ethnographique menée en 2013-2014 au sein des cours de français à l’Université de Moncton. Après avoir présenté le terrain, la méthodologie d’analyse critique et problématisé la situation des cours de français universitaires, le texte s’arrête sur la notion de néolibéralisme et analyse le corpus en fonction de deux de ses figures types majeures : l’individu-entrepreneur et l’individu-manager.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.368
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0150.039
Scholarly communication0.0140.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculaSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207