Formatrice en INSPE, orthopédagogue au Québec : dévoilement de l'intérieur des pratiques à l'endroit des élèves qui "n'apprennent pas dans la norme".
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis explores the challenges of inclusive education from a perspective situated between France and Quebec, combining the perspectives of an INSPE teacher trainer and a remedial or SEN teacher. Using an epistemological and comparative approach, it examines the historical, institutional and pedagogical mechanisms that shape the figures of “non-standard” pupils. The study reveals that inclusion in education, often proclaimed, remains unevenly implemented in both France and Quebec, due to systemic obstacles, professional tensions and territorial disparities. Immersion in a Quebec school and cross-analyses of teaching practices highlighted concrete levers - in particular a holistic approach to the pupil and access to specialised resources. These findings underline the urgent need to rethink the training, coordination and recognition of educational care professions. More than a solution, this research proposes a transformation of postures and invites us to think of the deployment of non-exclusion as a political and ethical project, to be built collectively.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".