MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390043359 · doi:10.7202/1108432ar

Un aperçu de la violence et des comportements agressifs auxquels sont confrontées sept directions d’école de langue française au Canada

2023· article· fr· W4390043359 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Mélissa Villella, Steve Sider

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPsychodrama and Leishmaniasis Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)SociologyPedagogyCritical reflectionPsychologyHumanitiesGender studiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peu de recherches examinent comment les directions d’école au Canada exercent leur leadership pour inclure les élèves ayant des besoins éducatifs particuliers (EBEP). Notre étude a examiné les expériences influençant le leadership de 285 directions d’école dans six provinces. En particulier, cet article a comme objectif d’aider les chercheur.e.s et les praticien.ne.s à mieux comprendre : 1) les incidents critiques en matière d’inclusion scolaire auxquels sont confrontées sept directions d’école de langue française (DELF) du Québec, du Nouveau-Brunswick et de l’Ontario, et 2) comment la violence et les comportements agressifs des EBEP influencent leur leadership. Les données font partie d’une étude pancanadienne bilingue; elles ont été recueillies au moyen d’un questionnaire et d’entrevues semi-dirigées. Les DELF favorisant l’inclusion des EBEP sont celles sachant comment prévenir les effets de la violence et les comportements agressifs sur le climat scolaire et possédant une formation universitaire avancée en matière d’adaptation scolaire en français.

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)0.008
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Educational Administration and PolicySame topicPsychodrama and Leishmaniasis StudiesFrench-language works237,207