MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322622936 · doi:10.53967/cje-rce.5547

Perception des éducatrices de l’intégration au préscolaire d’enfants ayant des besoins particuliers : une étude exploratoire

2023· article· fr· W4322622936 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Clara Soulez, Marie‐Julie Béliveau, Laurence Champagne, Chantale Breault, Fannie Labelle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducation · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsHôpital Rivière-des-PrairiesUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pour les enfants ayant des besoins particuliers, l’intégration au préscolaire est essentielle, puisqu’elle permet de promouvoir leur développement. Pourtant, au Québec, ils occupent peu des places disponibles et leur faible représentation pourrait être due aux croyances des éducatrices, ces croyances pouvant également influencer leur adaptation. Cette étude explore les perceptions des éducatrices quant à l’adaptation de 173 enfants d’une population clinique, par leur réponse à la question « L’enfant profite-t-il de la garderie ? ». Les réponses sont codifiées selon qu’elles reflètent des perceptions positives, nuancées ou négatives. Le Profil socio-affectif (PSA) de LaFrenière et al. (1997) a servi à mesurer la compétence sociale des enfants. La majorité des perceptions est positive (71 %). L’analyse des facteurs d’influence de la perception révèle des associations significatives avec la compétence sociale de l’enfant et son diagnostic, mais pas avec le type de milieu fréquenté. Les éducatrices perçoivent majoritairement les enfants vus en pédopsychiatrie comme profitant de la garderie.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Education / Revue canadienne de l éducationSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207