INTÉGRER LA LECTURE MULTIMODALE ET CRITIQUE EN CLASSE D’HISTOIRE : ÉTUDE DE CAS EXPLORATOIRE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La mobilisation de la bande dessinée historique comme matrice de savoirs en histoire permet d’incarner concrètement la rencontre de l’enseignement/apprentissage du décodage et de la compréhension multimodale, de la lecture pour apprendre et de la littératie critique. Qui plus est, elle est susceptible de contribuer au développement d’habiletés encore peu maîtrisées chez les élèves du primaire, dont les habiletés liées à la littératie multimodale et critique dans la perspective de l’apprentissage de l’histoire. Cet article présente les observations nées de la mise à l’essai au primaire (étude de cas) d’un dispositif didactique favorisant l’apprentissage par la lecture (Cartier, 2007) en histoire par le recours à la bande dessinée historique. Les premiers résultats obtenus permettent de consolider la viabilité et l’efficacité de ce dispositif sur la compétence en littératie médiatique multimodale (Lebrun et Lacelle, 2011), sur la compétence en littératie critique et sur l’acquisition de savoirs disciplinaires.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".