MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211253945 · doi:10.3138/cjpe.70502

L’évaluation évolutive, de la théorie à la pratique : perspectives de praticiens québécois

2021· article· en· W3211253945 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Pier‐Luc Turcotte, Lynda Rey, Astrid Brousselle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsÉcole Nationale d'Administration PubliqueUniversity of VictoriaUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSummative assessmentFormative assessmentValuation (finance)SociologyBusinessKnowledge managementPolitical sciencePedagogyComputer scienceAccounting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Quebec and Canadian organizations, communities, and professionals working collectively to address complex social issues in dynamic contexts are enthusiastically embracing social innovation. Some limitations in evaluating this innovation have been revealed by formative and summative evaluation approaches. Developmental evaluation (DE) could be a potential solution. This article combines scientific literature with the experience of experienced DE practitioners in Quebec. Balancing project management and evaluation, knowledge production and transformation of practices, continuous iterations and setting deadlines is at the very core of an effective DE approach.

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Program EvaluationSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207