MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200735036 · doi:10.7202/1079102ar

La collaboration famille – milieu de garde

2021· article· fr· W3200735036 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sylvain Coutu, Suzanne Lavigueur, Diane Dubeau, Marie‐Eve Beaudoin

Bibliographic record

VenueÉducation et francophonie · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParental Involvement in Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le principal objectif de cet article est de présenter une recension des écrits portant sur la collaboration et la communication entre les parents et les éducatrices travaillant en milieu de garde. Dans un premier temps, l’article aborde les aspects théoriques et historiques associés à la collaboration entre les adultes qui participent à l’éducation des jeunes enfants. Les effets de l’implication des parents dans les milieux éducatifs préscolaires, tels que démontrés par la recherche scientifique, font ensuite l’objet d’une attention particulière (notamment les effets de cette implication sur le développement et le bien-être des tout-petits). Le point suivant définit et illustre les différentes formes que peut prendre la collaboration entre les parents et les éducatrices; les conditions de réussite de cette collaboration sont également identifiées. La recension se termine en abordant trois thèmes ayant particulièrement attiré l’attention des chercheurs : la satisfaction des parents à l’égard des services éducatifs, les stratégies de communication parent-éducatrice et la question de la concordance éducative entre les adultes qui prennent quotidiennement en charge les jeunes enfants. La conclusion résume les points saillants qui se dégagent de la documentation consultée et présente quelques pistes prometteuses pour les recherches futures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.314 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉducation et francophonieSame topicParental Involvement in EducationFrench-language works237,207