Enseignement de la langue et de la littérature françaises médiévales en Ontario (Canada anglophone) : de l’utilité d’une troisième langue… morte
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Teaching Old French language and literature, away from the context of teacher's examination and ranking in France, requires a certain degree of innovation. It is especially true in the English speaking South West Ontario where the student body is both diverse and multiculturally rich. In that context, Old French language and literature are often seen as strange topics to focus on, especially since the textbooks are rarely adapted to their level of French, not to mention their knowledge of the specific history of the French medieval period. This article addresses some of the problems of teaching Old French language and literature as second language acquisition tools by suggesting approaches that have proven successful in our teaching practice. A hands on approach is especially productive, as students love to work directly from digitised manuscripts. Such an initiation to medieval writings in its manuscript context stimulates students' curiosity and offers them the extra motivation to discover an otherwise very abstract topic for any learner of French language and literature outside of France.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it