MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209816506 · doi:10.7202/1083007ar

Vers la consolidation d’une sociologie de l’évaluation scolaire : une revue de la littérature narrative en français

2020· article· fr· W3209816506 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Adriana Morales-Perlaza, Joëlle Morrissette

Bibliographic record

VenueMesure et évaluation en éducation · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEducational Assessment and Improvement
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceValuation (finance)ArtBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article vise à proposer une consolidation du domaine de la sociologie de l’évaluation scolaire, dans la suite des efforts entrepris en ce sens dans les années 1990. La mise à jour de ce domaine est cruciale, entre autres pour comprendre les changements survenus dans les pratiques d’évaluation des apprentissages des élèves à la suite de la mise en place de la nouvelle gestion publique. Pour ce faire, nous proposons une synthèse des connaissances adossée à l’analyse de 59 textes en français entretenant des liens étroits avec une sociologie de l’évaluation scolaire. Notre analyse fait ressortir quatre catégories d’enjeux sociologiques découlant de cette littérature : 1) la fonction formative de l’évaluation et la progression des apprentissages ; 2) l’évaluation d’un savoir agir et l’adaptation aux contextes complexes ; 3) l’évaluation externe et standardisée, et la fabrication des résultats mesurables ; et 4) l’évaluation comme matérialisation des normes d’excellence et la démocratisation de la réussite scolaire. Nous concluons avec la présentation de perspectives de recherche qui favoriseraient la consolidation de ce domaine.

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0120.038
Scholarly communication0.0240.016
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMesure et évaluation en éducationSame topicEducational Assessment and ImprovementFrench-language works237,207