MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312285766 · doi:10.7202/1090353ar

Intégrer langue, (inter)culture et communautés migrantes dans les Programmes d’enseignement des langues d’origine (PELO)

2022· article· fr· W4312285766 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Monique Lebrun, Denise Lussier

Bibliographic record

Venue˜La œRevue de l'AQEFLS/Revue de l'AQEFLS · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le présent article fait le point sur le Programme des langues d’origine (le PELO) développé par le ministère de l’Éducation du Québec en 1978 et trace les assises d’un nouveau programme visant à répondre aux besoins de l’évolution des populations migrantes dans leur diversité. On y retrouve un portrait sommaire de la clientèle scolaire, les enjeux politiques et éducatifs de la société d’accueil, les fondements d’un nouveau programme PELO, l’appropriation d’un cadre de référence intégrant « langue » et « culture » ainsi qu’une conception de l’enseignement / apprentissage renouvelé permettant à l’école de devenir un lieu d’échange linguistique, (inter)culturel et communautaire par une manière d’être, de penser et d’agir où tous se considèrent mutuellement comme des passeurs culturels. Ces propositions découlent d’une recherche-action réalisée par les chercheurs auprès des divers intervenants qui oeuvrent à la Commission scolaire de Montréal afin de cerner les problématiques liées à l’enseignement du programme PELO actuel.

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)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.380
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; 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
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜La œRevue de l'AQEFLS/Revue de l'AQEFLSSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207