MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412818668 · doi:10.32316/hse-rhe.2025.5425

Le Conseil supérieur de l’éducation pendant la deuxième ère de Robert Bourassa (1985-1994) une « table des sages » en quête d’action

2025· article· fr· W4412818668 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olivier Lemieux, Jean‐Philippe Warren

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducation · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyTable (database)Computer scienceDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

De 1985 à 1994, le Conseil supérieur de l’éducation traverse une période déterminante sous les présidences de Pierre Lucier et Robert Bisaillon. Lucier (1984–1989) réoriente le CSE en renforçant sa crédibilité scientifique et en structurant les avis pour qu’ils soient plus cohérents et influents, consolidant ainsi le rôle du CSE comme « table des sages ». Sous le leadership de Bisaillon (1989–1994), le CSE s’investit dans des travaux qui alimentent les réformes éducatives majeures des années 1990, notamment le « Renouveau pédagogique », marquant une osmose inédite entre les orientations ministérielles et les travaux du CSE. Ensemble, ces deux hommes, et les équipes qu’ils ont su constituer autour d’eux, ont joué un rôle décisif dans la consolidation du CSE, ainsi que dans l’élaboration et le déploiement des grandes réformes des années 1990 et du début des années 2000. L’étude de cette phase de l’existence du CSE permet ainsi de renouveler notre compréhension des réflexions et débats ayant mené aux États généraux de 1995–96.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical Studies in Education / Revue d histoire de l éducationSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207