MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4284896126 · doi:10.53967/cje-rce.v45i2.4789

Le regard des collégiens sur le parcours scolaire et le rapport aux études de leurs parents

2022· article· fr· W4284896126 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Frédéric Deschenaux, Francis Charlebois, Sylvain Bourdon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Malgré les progrès notables réalisés dans l’accès aux études supérieures au Québec, on remarque encore des inégalités de fréquentation chez certains groupes sociaux. Afin d’explorer le contexte social d’élaboration des projets d’études, l’analyse thématique de 96 entretiens avec des collégiens permet de mieux comprendre le regard qu’ils portent sur le rapport aux études et le parcours scolaire de leurs parents. L’analyse révèle cinq types de rapport aux études des parents (indifférent, utilitaire, lucide, protecteur et autoritaire), qui se présentent seuls ou en combinaison avec les autres. Il s’en dégage également un regard souvent mélioratif que les jeunes portent sur le parcours scolaire de leurs parents, assez clivé selon le niveau de scolarité de leurs parents et marqué par une forme de bienveillance ou de compréhension. La discussion aborde également la persistance de l’influence du milieu familial dans le parcours scolaire des jeunes au cégep.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0160.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation→Same topicSocial Sciences and Governance→French-language works237,207→