MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300627097 · doi:10.7202/1086171ar

Accompagnement et évaluation d’un stagiaire en difficulté : parcours d’enseignants

2007· article· fr· W4300627097 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michel Le Page, Colette Gervais

Bibliographic record

VenueMesure et évaluation en éducation · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvaluation of Teaching Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesValuation (finance)SociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’accompagnement et l’évaluation d’un étudiant pendant une expérience de stage d’enseignement sont des tâches exigeantes, confiées à un enseignant en exercice. Lorsque le stagiaire connaît des difficultés, ce « formateur de terrain » peut douter de ses propres compétences, s’interroger sur la légitimité de son rôle et l’amener à rechercher des ressources et des façons de faire. Ce texte présente les résultats d’une étude réalisée auprès d’enseignants qui ont eu à accompagner des stagiaires en difficulté. L’analyse de leurs propos révèle leur parcours d’accompagnement et d’évaluation, montrant qu’ils portent un jugement rapidement, dès le début du processus, et qu’ils assument pleinement leur rôle d’évaluateur.

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)0.174
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1740.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMesure et évaluation en éducationSame topicEvaluation of Teaching PracticesFrench-language works237,207