MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7155100174 · doi:10.3917/savo.034.0085b

OCDE (2010). Comment apprend-on ? La recherche au service de la pratique. Paris : Éditions de l’OCDE

2014· article· fr· W7155100174 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philippe Carré

Bibliographic record

VenueSavoirs · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary, Security, and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService (business)Field (mathematics)Context (archaeology)Subject (documents)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les conseillers pédagogiques ont entre autres pour fonction d’assurer la formation continue et l’accompagnement pédagogique des enseignants. Leur travail présente de nombreux défis, dont ceux de construire leur compétence et d’assurer leur crédibilité en tant que formateurs d’adultes auprès des membres du corps enseignant duquel ils sont eux-mêmes issus. Lors d’entretiens semi-dirigés, onze conseillers pédagogiques à l’emploi d’un conseil scolaire de l’Ontario, au Canada, ont mis en lumière les stratégies par lesquelles ils parvenaient à développer et à maintenir leur sentiment d’efficacité personnelle en tant que formateurs d’adultes. Au cours de cet article, les stratégies relationnelles, de gestion du travail et d’attitude qui ont émergé d’une analyse inductive des données seront discutées.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSavoirsSame topicMilitary, Security, and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207