Notice bibliographique
Résumé
06–701Boon, Andrew (Toyo Gakuen U, Japan; bromleycross@ hotmail.com ), The search for irony: A textual analysis of the lyrics of ‘Ironic’ by Alanis Morissette. The Reading Matrix (Readingmatrix.com) 5.2 (2005), 129–142. 06–702Brantmeir, Cindy (Washington U, USA; cbrantme@wustle.edu ), The effects of language of assessment and L2 reading performance on advanced readers' recall. The Reading Matrix (Readingmatrix.com) 6.1 (2006), 1–17. 06–703Brooks, Wanda (Temple U, Philadelphia, USA), Reading representations of themselves: Urban youth use culture and African American textual features to develop literary understandings. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association) 41.3 (2006), 372–392. 06–704Burns, Eila (Jyvaskyla U of Applied Sciences, Finland; eila.burns@jypoly.fi ), Pause, prompt and praise – Peer tutored reading for pupils with learning difficulties. British Journal of Special Education (Blackwell) 33.2 (2006), 62–67. 06–705Carlisle, Joanne F. & C. Addison Stone, Exploring the role of morphemes in word reading. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association) 40.4 (2005), 428–449. 06–706Cho, Kwangsu, Christian D. Schunn (U Pittsburgh, PA, USA) & Davida Charney, Commenting on writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts.Written Communication (Sage) 23.3 (2006), 260–294. 06–707Cunningham, James W. (U North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA), Stephanie A. Spadorcia, Karen A. Erickson, David A. Koppenhaver, Janet M. Sturm & David E. Yoder, Investigating the instructional supportiveness of leveled texts. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association) 40.4 (2005), 410–427. 06–708DeVoss, Dànıelle Nıcole & James E. Porter (Michigan State U, USA), Why Napster matters to writing: Filesharing as a new ethic of digital delivery. Computers and Composition (Elsevier) 23.1 (2006), 178–210. 06–709Ghahremani-ghajar, Sue-San (Al-Zahra U, Iran) & Seyyed Abdolhamid Mirhosseini, English class or speaking about everything class? Dialogue journal writing as a critical EFL literacy practice in an Iranian high school. Language, Culture and Curriculum (Multilingual Matters) 18.3 (2005), 286–299. 06–710Hunter, Darryl (U British Columbia, Canada; Darrylinvic@hotmail.com ), Charles Mayenga & Trevor Gambell, Classroom assessment tools and uses: Canadian English teachers' practices for writing. Assessing Writing (Elsevier) 11.1 (2006), 42–65. 06–711Jarratt, Susan C., Elızabeth Losh & Davıd Puente (U California at Irvine, USA), Transnational identifications: Biliterate writers in a first-year humanities course. Journal of Second Language Writing (Elsevier) 15.1 (2006), 24–48. 06–712Jocson, Korina M. (Stanford U, USA), ‘Bob Dylan and Hip Hop’: Intersecting literacy practices in youth poetry communities. Written Communication (Sage) 23.3 (2006), 231–259. 06–713Jones, Rodney H., Angel Garralda, Davıd C. S. Lı & Graham Lock (City U Hong Kong, China), Interactional dynamics in on-line and face-to-face peer-tutoring sessions for second language writers. Journal of Second Language Writing (Elsevier) 15.1 (2006), 1–23. 06–714Kruse, Otto (Zurich U of Applied Sciences, Winterthur, Switzerland), The origins of writing in the disciplines: Traditions of seminar writing and the Humboldtian ideal of the research university.Written Communication (Sage) 23.3 (2006), 331–352. 06–715Li, Jiang ( jianli@enoreo.on.ca ), The mediation of technology in ESL writing and its implications for writing assessment. Assessing Writing (Elsevier) 11.1 (2006), 5–21. 06–716Lunsford, Andrea A. (Stanford U, USA), Writing, technologies, and the fifth canon. Computers and Composition (Elsevier) 23.1 (2006), 169–177. 06–717Marsh, Jackie (U Sheffield, UK), Popular culture in the literacy curriculum: A Bourdieuan analysis. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association) 41.2 (2006), 160–174. 06–718Martin, Deb (Rowan U, USA; martind@rowan.edu ) &Diane Penrod, Coming to know criteria: The value of an evaluating writing course for undergraduates. Assessing Writing (Elsevier) 11.1 (2006), 66–73. 06–719McIntyre, Ellen, Diane W. Kyle (U Louisville, USA) & Gayle H. Moore, A primary-grade teacher's guidance toward small-group dialogue. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association) 41.1 (2006), 36–66. 06–720McQuillan, Jeff (Center for Educational Development, USA; jeff@learningexperts.com ), The effects of print access and print exposure on English vocabulary acquisition of language minority students. The Reading Matrix (Readingmatrix.com) 6.1 (2006), 41–51. 06–721Neuman, Susan B. (U Michigan, USA) & Donna Celano, The knowledge gap: Implications of leveling the playing field for low-income and middle-income children. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association), 41.2 (2006), 176–201. 06–722O'Sullıvan, Íde & Angela Chambers (U Limerick, Ireland), Learners' writing skills in French: Corpus consultation and learner evaluation. Journal of Second Language Writing (Elsevier) 15.1 (2006), 49–68. 06–723Pino-Silva, Juan (U Simón Bolivar, Venezuela; jpino@usb.ve ), Extensive reading through the internet: Is it worth the while?The Reading Matrix ( Readingmatrix.com ) 6.1 (2006), 85–96. 06–724Rogers, Theresa (U British Columbia, Canada) Elizabeth Marshall& Cynthia A. Tyson, Dialogic narratives of literacy, teaching, and schooling: Preparing literacy teachers for diverse settings. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association) 41.2 (2006) 202–224. 06–725Scott, Tony (U North Carolina, USA), Writing work, technology, and pedagogy in the era of late capitalism. Computers and Composition (Elsevier) 23. 1 (2006), 228–243. 06–726Tian, Shiauping (National Taiwan U of Science and Technology, Taiwan; sptian@mail.ntust.edu.tw. ), Passage dependency of reading comprehension items in the GEPT and the TOEFL. The Reading Matrix (Readingmatrix.com) 6.1 (2006), 66–84. 06–727Tseng, Yen-Chu & Hsien-Chin Liou (National Tsing Hua U, China; hcliu@mx.nthu.edu.tw ), The effects of online conjunction materials on college EFL students' writing. System (Elsevier) 34.2 (2006), 270–283. 06–728VanderStaay, Steven L. (Western Washington U, Bellingham, USA), Learning from longitudinal research in criminology and the health sciences. Reading Research Quarterly (International Reading Association) 41.3 (2006), 328–350.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,010 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,708 | 0,732 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».