La qualite des interactions en service de garde en milieu familial : regards croises sur l’approche normative et l’approche de faire sens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article vise à décrire les conceptions des responsables de service de garde en milieu familial au sujet de la qualité des interactions. Utilisant une approche de faire sens, des entretiens semi-structurés ont permis de recueillir les conceptions des participantes pour ensuite faire l’objet d’une analyse culturelle et les comparer aux domaines et dimensions du Classroom Assessment Scoring System Trottineur, un instrument standardisé conçu pour mesurer, selon une approche normative, la qualité des interactions dans les services de garde en installation. Les résultats exposent surtout des différences dans les conceptions sur les interactions vécues en milieu familial et en installation. La mixité des langages s’avère nécessaire pour tenir compte de la culture distincte des services de garde en milieu familial.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".