LES ÉPREUVES QUI DONNENT SENS AU RÔLE D’ACCOMPAGNEMENT DES ENSEIGNANTS ASSOCIÉS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette contribution porte sur l’expérience professionnelle des enseignants associés qui interviennent auprès des stagiaires en formation à l’enseignement professionnel. En s’appuyant sur les notions d’épreuve et d’expérience, cet article porte un regard original sur le parcours professionnel des enseignants associés étudié à travers d’une recherche doctorale. Principalement dégagés à partir d’entretiens biographiques et d’une démarche d’analyse structurale, les résultats rapportent trois principaux évènements constituant des épreuves partagées par les enseignants associés. Ils décrivent l’influence de ces évènements dans l’appropriation de ce rôle professionnel. Les conclusions appuient, entre autres, l’importance du soutien reçu pendant l’insertion dans la profession, ainsi que la formation universitaire associée, non pas par rapport au rôle d’enseignant, mais pour celui d’enseignant associé.
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 | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".