MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202856677 · doi:10.7202/1081286ar

Les normes sociales collectives au sein des groupes de soutien d’apprentissage en famille

2021· article· fr· W3202856677 on OpenAlex
Marine Dumond, Christine Brabant

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNouveaux cahiers de la recherche en éducation · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Education Studies and Reforms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’apprentissage en famille (AEF) est une option éducative légale encadrée par le ministère de l’Éducation du Québec (MEQ). Son suivi par l’État présente plusieurs défis, notamment concernant l’appréciation de l’expérience éducative. Dans une perspective de gouvernance réflexive, les groupes de soutien locaux et auto-organisés de familles, par leur position intermédiaire et collective, pourraient jouer un rôle de suivi complémentaire et mieux accepté que celui des autorités ministérielles. Au moyen d’entrevues de groupe et d’analyse de documents, les normes sociales collectives explicites et implicites de deux groupes de soutien québécois, portant sur la socialisation, l’engagement parental et l’enrichissement de l’expérience éducative, sont décrites. Leurs visées communes avec le cadre juridique en place suggèrent que le groupe de soutien peut être un outil facilitant dans la gouvernance de l’AEF.

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.218
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.212 · 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