Les cercles d’apprentissage et d’inclusion comme facilitateurs du développement des pratiques enseignantes à l’école secondaire. Revue internationale de communication et de socialisation, 2(1), 33-45
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au Québec, les différentes réformes ont introduit des bouleversements dans les pratiques éducatives des enseignants du secondaire. Les changements apportés ont eu des répercussions sur le développement des compétences professionnelles des enseignants et sur l’instauration des stratégies de formation continue novatrices. C’est dans ce cadre que se justifie l’implantation de nouveaux dispositifs appelés cercles d’apprentissage et d’inclusion. L’objectif visait à soutenir le développement professionnel des enseignants et à proposer un socle commun de pratiques pédagogiques susceptibles de répondre aux besoins singuliers de chacun des acteurs concernés. Tout au long de ce projet, la transmission s’est posée comme un enjeu incontournable qui continue d’alimenter notre réflexion tant sous l'angle de la recherche que sous celui de la pratique au quotidien.
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 | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".