Enquête provinciale sur les pratiques inclusives \nen enseignement de l’éducation physique et à la santé \nRapport provincial primaire et secondaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les objectifs de cette recherche évaluative auprès des enseignants en éducation physique et à la santé visent à : 1. Décrire leur situation professionnelle et leurs besoins de formation; 2. Décrire leurs pratiques de différenciation pédagogique, les attitudes, les croyances et les intentions d’agir en regard de l’inclusion et des élèves ayant des besoins particuliers; 3. Examiner les variables qui influencent les pratiques inclusives dans ce domaine d’enseignement spécialisé. Les enseignants de cinquante commissions scolaires du Québec ont participé à ce projet. Ce rapport présente une synthèse des principaux résultats concernant les deux premiers objectifs, soit le portrait de la situation professionnelle, des besoins de formation et des pratiques de différenciation pédagogique des enseignants à l’égard des élèves présentant des besoins particuliers en éducation physique et à la santé.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".