MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7141809311 · doi:10.4000/15yjx

Des œuvres qui font de l’effet : étude comparative de pratiques d’enseignement du débat interprétatif au secondaire québécois

2025· book-chapter· fr· W7141809311 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marion Sauvaire, Alexandra Gagné

Bibliographic record

VenuePresses Universitaires de Bordeaux eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sainte Foy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Focus (optics)Context (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette recherche porte sur l’enseignement du débat interprétatif (désormais « DI ») au 2e cycle du secondaire québécois. La recherche a été menée grâce à la collaboration de huit enseignantes chevronnées qui ont expérimenté trois DI sur chacune des trois œuvres choisies en commun durant l’année scolaire 2018-2019 après avoir participé à une formation de plus de 20 heures. Les données collectées (23 DI filmés, 46 entrevues avec les enseignantes et 1 013 textes d’élèves) ont été retranscrites i...

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.343

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0150.018
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuePresses Universitaires de Bordeaux eBooksSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207