MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365151209 · doi:10.7202/1098479ar

Trajectoires de directions d’établissement scolaire dans le cadre d’une démarche d’accompagnement au soutien d’enseignants dans leurs pratiques évaluatives

2023· article· fr· W4365151209 on OpenAlexaff
Sylvie Fontaine, Lorraine Savoie‐Zajc, Alain Cadieux, Jennifer Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueEnseignement et recherche en administration de l’éducation · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les changements dans le domaine de l’évaluation des apprentissages ont influencé le contexte professionnel des directions d’établissement scolaire, qui sont responsables de soutenir le personnel enseignant dans leurs pratiques évaluatives. Cet article présente deux trajectoires issues d’une recherche-action visant le développement des compétences en accompagnement des directions concernant l’évaluation des apprentissages. Des communautés d’apprentissage composées de gestionnaires œuvrant dans des écoles primaires et secondaires ont été formées et des rencontres, de groupe et individuelles, se sont déroulées sur une période de deux ans. La collecte de données, réalisées à partir des journaux de bord et des comptes rendus de rencontres, a permis de tracer les trajectoires individuelles des participants, lesquelles reflètent les ajustements de pratique effectués par les directions d’établissement scolaire quant à l’accompagnement qu’elles offrent au personnel enseignant au regard de l’évaluation des apprentissages.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.557
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.028 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnseignement et recherche en administration de l’éducationSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207