Collaboration et planification de situations mathématiques : conceptions d’orthopédagogues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La collaboration et la planification constituent des compétences professionnelles incontournables de la profession d’un orthopédagogue considérant le rôle spécifique qui s’inscrit dans les fondements de l’enseignement. Des recherches ont mis en évidence l’évolution des conceptions des intervenantes quant à la collaboration et la planification au cours de leur carrière. Cet article se distingue de ces recherches puisqu’il documente les conceptions des orthopédagogues à l’éducation préscolaire et au premier cycle du primaire en ce qui concerne la collaboration au regard de la planification d’activités en mathématique. Les résultats décrivent le lexique utilisé par ces orthopédagogues, ce qui permet de dégager des implications pour la formation initiale et continue ainsi que pour la recherche en enseignement.
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 | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".