Efficience des joueurs dans la ligue nationale de hockey.

En l’absence de mesure précise et unique de l’efficience pour les joueurs de hockey, la présente étude a pour objectifs d’évaluer l’efficience des joueurs dans la Ligue Nationale de Hockey (LNH) et de montrer comment celle-ci peut affecter la décision de racheter le contrat d’un joueur. Pour ce faire, les statistiques individuelles des joueurs de la LNH pour les saisons 2007-2008 à 2010-2011 sont utilisées. Pour estimer l’efficience, la méthode de l’enveloppement de données (DEA) avec bootstrap est utilisée. Les inputs incluent le salaire et le nombre de minutes de jeu, alors que les outputs incluent la contribution défensive et offensive de chaque joueur. Pour estimer l’association entre l’efficience individuelle et la probabilité d’un rachat de contrat, une régression logistique est utilisée. L’analyse des données montre que parmi 3 159 observations, l’efficience moyenne est de 0,635. L’efficience moyenne est similaire pour toutes les positions et toutes les saisons. Un lien positif et fort est trouvé entre le nombre de points au classement général d’une équipe et l’efficience moyenne des joueurs qui la compose (coefficient de corrélation=0,43, valeur-p<0,01). Les joueurs avec une efficience plus élevée ont une probabilité plus faible de voir leur contrat racheté (rapport des chances=0,01, valeur-p<0,01). La présente étude conclut donc que la plupart des joueurs de hockey dans la LNH ont un degré d’inefficience non négligeable, qu’une efficience plus élevée est associée à une meilleure performance au niveau de l’équipe et que les joueurs efficients ont une probabilité plus faible de voir leur contrat racheté.

Journalisation dans un Programme de carrière en nouveaux médias : Le rôle de la réflexion par l’action

The purpose of this case study is to report on the use of learning journals as a strategy to encourage critical reflection in the field of graphic design. Very little empirical research has been published regarding the use of critical reflection in learning journals in this field. Furthermore, nothing has been documented at the college level. To that end, the goal of this research endeavor was to investigate whether second-year students in the NewMedia and Publication Design Program at a small Anglophone CEGEP in Québec, enrolled in a Page Layout and Design course, learn more deeply by reflecting in action during design projects or reflecting on action after completing design projects. Secondarily, indications of a possible change in self-efficacy were examined. Two hypotheses were posited: 1) reflection-on-action journaling will promote a deeper approach to learning than reflection-in-action journaling, and 2) the level of self-efficacy in graphic design improves as students are encouraged to think reflectively. Using both qualitative and quantitative methods, a mixed methods approach was used to collect and analyze the data. Content analysis of journal entries and interview responses was the primary method used to address the first hypothesis. Students were required to journal twice for each of three projects, once during the project and again one week after the project had been submitted. In addition, data regarding the students' perception of journaling was obtained through administering a survey and conducting interviews. For the second hypothesis, quantitative methods were used through the use of two surveys, one administered early in the Fall 2011 semester and the second administered early in the Winter 2012 semester. Supplementary data regarding self-efficacy was obtained in the form of content analysis of journal entries and interviews. Coded journal entries firmly supported the hypothesis that reflection-on-action journaling promotes deep learning. Using a taxonomy developed by Kember et al. (1999) wherein "critical reflection" is considered the highest level of reflection, it was found that only 5% of the coded responses in the reflection-in-action journals were deemed of the highest level, whereas 39% were considered critical reflection in the reflection-on-action journals. The findings from the interviews suggest that students had some initial concerns about the value of journaling, but these concerns were later dismissed as students learned that journaling was a valuable tool that helped them reflect and learn. All participants indicated that journaling changed their learning processes as they thought much more about what they were doing while they were doing it. They were taking the learning they had acquired and thinking about how they would apply it to new projects; this is critical reflection. The survey findings did not support the conclusive results of the comparison of journal instruments, where an increase of 35% in critical reflection was noted in the reflection-on-action journals. In Chapter 5, reasons for this incongruence are explored. Furthermore, based on the journals, surveys, and interviews, there is not enough evidence at this time to support the hypothesis that self-efficacy improves when students are encouraged to think reflectively. It could be hypothesized, however, that one's self-efficacy does not change in such a short period of time. In conclusion, the findings established in this case study make a practical contribution to the literature concerning the promotion of deep learning in the field of graphic design, as this researcher's hypothesis was supported that reflection-on-action journaling promoted deeper learning than reflection-in-action journaling. When examining the increases in critical reflection from reflection-in-action to the reflection-on-action journals, it was found that all students but one showed an increase in critical reflection in reflection-on-action journals. It is therefore recommended that production-oriented program instructors consider integrating reflection-on-action journaling into their courses where projects are given.