MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214687816 · doi:10.52358/mm.vi9.247

Évaluation des apprentissages en formation à distance en enseignement supérieur, une note de lecture sur l’ouvrage de Lafleur, Nolla et Samson

2022· article· fr· W4214687816 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Naomie Fournier Dubé

Bibliographic record

VenueMédiations et médiatisations · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceValuation (finance)ArtHumanitiesBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dirigé par France Lafleur, Jean-Marc Nolla et Ghislain Samson, l’ouvrage Évaluation des apprentissages en formation à distance : Enjeux, modalités et opportunités de formation en enseignement supérieur, composé de neuf chapitres, met de l’avant l’expertise de différents acteurs en sciences de l'éducation, au regard de l’évaluation en formation à distance, dans le contexte de l’enseignement postsecondaire.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.291 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMédiations et médiatisationsSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207