MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169011642 · doi:10.3917/spir.hs5.0003

Efficacité d’une formation en ligne pour les enseignants afin d’améliorer la gestion des comportements extériorisés

2021· article· fr· W3169011642 on OpenAlexaff
Alexis Boudreault, Julie Lessard, Frédéric Guay

Bibliographic record

VenueSpirale - Revue de recherches en éducation · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude a pour but d’évaluer une formation, en ligne asynchrone, qui vise à améliorer chez les enseignants leur gestion des comportements extériorisés des élèves. Pour atteindre cet objectif, nous avons recruté 80 enseignants et 157 de leurs élèves. Les élèves ont été ciblés en raison de leur niveau de comportements extériorisés jugé élevé. Les 80 enseignants ont été affectés aléatoirement à un groupe contrôle ou à un groupe expérimental. Les enseignants ont rempli à deux reprises (prétest, posttest) des mesures qui évaluent : 1) les stratégies qu’ils utilisent, 2) leurs perceptions des comportements des élèves de la classe, 3) leurs perceptions des comportements de deux élèves ciblés en raison de leurs comportements extériorisés élevés. Les analyses par modèles mixtes linéaires montrent que les enseignants du groupe expérimental rapportent utiliser moins de stratégies punitives. Le niveau global des comportements extériorisés des élèves de la classe ainsi que les comportements agressifs et délinquants des élèves ciblés était jugé plus faible par les enseignants qui ont suivi la formation comparativement à ceux du groupe contrôle.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.426
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.017 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpirale - Revue de recherches en éducationSame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207