La collaboration interprofessionnelle chez des conseillères et conseillers d’orientation dans des écoles secondaires privées au Québec : le métier mis à l’épreuve
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La collaboration interprofessionnelle chez des conseillères et conseillers d'orientation dans des écoles secondaires privées au Québec : le métier mis à l'épreuve Formation et profession 33(1), 2025 • 1 ésumé Cet article examine la manière dont les conseillères et conseillers d' orientation (CO) au Québec vivent la collaboration interprofessionnelle (CIP) prescrite par les réformes éducatives.Utilisant la méthode d'instruction au sosie, l' étude révèle que les CO doivent composer avec des obstacles comme les tensions de territoire et de pouvoir professionnels et la méconnaissance de leur rôle.Si leur métier est ainsi mis à l' épreuve, il constitue aussi une ressource pour faire face à ces contraintes : les CO y puisent des savoir-agir, comme les compétences relationnelles.L' étude conclut sur l'importance de mettre en débat le travail réel nécessaire pour collaborer en milieu scolaire.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".