Variété et complexité des situations de travail et reconnaissance des acquis de métier: le travail des experts-évaluateurs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article examine le travail des professionnels expérimentés qui agissentà titre d’experts-évaluateurs dans le cadre du processus dereconnaissance des acquis de métier (RAM) au baccalauréat enenseignement professionnel (BEP) dans une université québécoise.Partant du constat que les concepts de « variété » et de « complexité » dessituations de travail se situent au centre de l’activité évaluative, cet articletente de montrer comment ces concepts sont construits et mobilisés parles experts-évaluateurs dans l’analyse des dossiers des étudiantscandidats à la RAM. Pour finir, l’article propose quelques pistes pour laformation des experts-évaluateurs, dans une visée d’homogénéisation despratiques évaluatives.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".