Proposition d’une grille d’analyse des pratiques critiques d’élèves en situation de résolution de problèmes dits complexes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis près de 30 ans, différents outils ont été développés afin d’évaluer le niveau de pensée critique et analyser son exercice. La plupart de ces outils prennent la forme de questionnaires soumis à un processus d’analyse quantitative. Cependant, cette approche est remise en question car elle ne permettrait pas, notamment, d’étudier adéquatement les dispositions à mobiliser une pensée critique en situation. Partant, l’approche qualitative se présente de plus en plus comme une alternative. Dans le présent article, l’auteur porte un regard évaluatif sur ces outils, le conduisant ainsi à proposer une grille d’analyse des pratiques critiques en situation de résolution de problèmes dits complexes, laquelle s’inscrit à l’intérieur d’un processus de recherche qualitative.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it