MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389722268 · doi:10.7202/1108073ar

La prise en compte de la diversité à l’école dans les textes officiels : un bilan au Québec et en milieu minoritaire francophone canadien

2023· article· fr· W4389722268 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Carl Beaudoin

Bibliographic record

VenueEnfance en difficulté · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesFrenchSociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

S’appuyant en partie sur une recherche documentaire effectuée sur les politiques éducatives canadiennes relatives au bien-être, à la réussite et à la diversité à l’école (Rousseau et al., en cours), ce texte a pour but de dresser un bilan quant à la prise en compte de la diversité à l’école au Québec et en contexte minoritaire francophone canadien. À la suite de la recension des textes officiels des différentes provinces sur cette question, nous avons procédé à l’examen du corpus de données qualitatives à l’aide de l’analyse par réseau. Les principaux résultats mettent en relief trois différentes approches qui émergent des textes politiques officiels pour considérer la diversité des élèves, soit celle centrée sur les marqueurs des élèves, celle en réponse aux phénomènes socioéducatifs et celle centrée sur les besoins des élèves. Ces résultats incitent à réfléchir sur la persistance de l’approche catégorielle des difficultés à l’école et sur l’importance de l’éducation à la diversité pour contrer les formes de discrimination associées.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.429

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0110.008
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnfance en difficultéSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207