MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6979898124

Analyse de la cohérence entre les besoins psychoreligieux des jeunes de 12-13 ans et les thèmes prescrits du volet culture religieuse au premier cycle du secondaire dans le programme québécois d’Éthique et culture religieuse

2021· other· fr· W6979898124 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge UdeS (Institutional Deposit of the University of Sherbrooke) · 2021
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsESPACEPublic spacePublic cultureSocial knowledgeCultural environment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À l’automne 2008 au Québec, le ministère de l’Éducation met en place le programme Éthique et culture religieuse dans les écoles primaires et secondaires, suite à un vaste débat public concernant la place de la religion dans le système scolaire. À ce nouveau programme, on appose deux grandes finalités : la poursuite du bien commun et la reconnaissance de l’autre. La première finalité manifeste ainsi une volonté politique de prendre en considération la diversité religieuse de la société et la seconde finalité veut « construire un espace commun, au-delà des différences et des intérêts particuliers, autour d’une culture publique et de valeurs partagées par tous ». Toutefois, l’état de la recherche autour de la création du programme d’ÉCR invite à s’interroger pour découvrir s'il y a vraiment eu un croisement entre le développement psycho-religieux des jeunes et les attentes du ministère face aux savoirs que doivent acquérir les jeunes de la première et de la deuxième années du secondaire.

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)0.007
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge UdeS (Institutional Deposit of the University of Sherbrooke)→French-language works237,207→