Techniques d’animation et recherche-action dans le milieu éducatif québécois
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À la suite d’une demande d’évaluation des ressources éducatives d’un système éducatif, les animateurs-chercheurs ont mis de l’avant l’utilisation de techniques efficientes pour procéder à la cueillette de données concernant la vision et la perception de deux écoles fréquentées par les membres de la communauté algonquienne Anishnabe dans le nord-ouest du Québec (Canada) et de la direction générale des établissements, qui calque sa gestion sur le modèle des autres écoles québécoises. Un parallèle se dresse entre les fonctions d’un animateur socioculturel et celles d’un chercheur qui utilise une approche de recherche-action. Ce texte interroge le sens de l’animation socioculturelle et dans une société en mutation et cherche à définir un projet éducatif qui réponde à la fois aux exigences du programme gouvernemental et aux aspirations des jeunes issus des premières nations.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".