MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160596788 · doi:10.7202/1077003ar

Les conditions favorables à la persévérance scolaire chez des étudiantes et étudiants autochtones de la communauté d’Essipit

2021· article· fr· W3160596788 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Alexandra I. Mansour, Danielle Maltais, Mathieu Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueÉducation et francophonie · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plusieurs recherches rapportent un écart important entre les étudiantes et étudiants autochtones et non autochtones en ce qui a trait à la persévérance scolaire et à l’obtention d’un diplôme qualifiant. Chez les membres de la communauté innue d’Essipit (Québec, Canada) qui poursuivent des études secondaires, collégiales ou universitaires, la situation est toutefois moins problématique. Cet article est le résultat d’une étude qualitative réalisée auprès de neuf jeunes issues de cette communauté et qui persévèrent dans leurs études. Trois questions ont guidé la réalisation de l’étude : 1) Quels sont les facteurs de protection liés à la persévérance scolaire des jeunes de la communauté d’Essipit? 2) Quels sont les motifs qui encouragent les jeunes de cette communauté à poursuivre leurs études? 3) Quelles interventions mises en place dans cette communauté favorisent la persévérance scolaire? Cet article démontre que différents motifs et facteurs de protection influencent positivement la persévérance des jeunes, dont les encouragements et le soutien que ceux-ci reçoivent de leur entourage et des membres de leur communauté, ainsi que les programmes qui leur sont offerts.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.545
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.374 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉducation et francophonieSame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207