MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367153813 · doi:10.7202/1096451ar

Regards croisés sur les pratiques de différenciation pédagogique favorisant l’inclusion scolaire des élèves doués au primaire

2023· article· fr· W4367153813 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Claire Baudry, Line Massé, Claudia Verret, Jeanne Lagacé-Leblanc, Véronique Primeau, Isabelle Martineau-Crète, Caroline Couture, Marie‐France Nadeau, Jean-Yves Bégin

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGill · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational and Psychological Assessments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude vise à identifier les pratiques de différenciation pédagogique mises en place au primaire qui facilitent ou nuisent à l’inclusion des élèves doués en classe ordinaire. La collecte de données réalisée auprès de 24 élèves doués âgés de 6 à 11 ans, de leurs parents et de leurs enseignants comprend une entrevue semi-structurée, l’utilisation du WISC-VCDN-F et du Système d’évaluation du comportement de l’enfant, BASC-3CNF. L’analyse qualitative du discours permet de croiser les différentes perspectives des acteurs. Le respect du rythme d’apprentissage, l’approndissement des contenus et la qualité de la relation enseignant-élève favorisent le sentiment d’inclusion de l’élève et son bien-être. À l’inverse, la répétition des contenus et les activités trop faciles sont perçues comme nuisibles.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.327
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.148 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Journal of Education / Revue des sciences de l éducation de McGillSame topicEducational and Psychological AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207