MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999761831 · doi:10.7202/013483ar

Validation et consistance interne d’une batterie de tests pour l’évaluation multidimensionnelle de la lecture en français

2006· article· fr· W1999761831 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Pierre Cormier, Alain Desrochers, Monique Sénéchal

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences de l éducation · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nous présentons les considérations théoriques qui guident l’élaboration de la batterie de tests destinée à l’évaluation de la lecture en français. Ensuite, nous étayons les cinq domaines ciblés par la Batterie d’épreuves multidimensionnelles pour l’évaluation de la lecture (BÉMÉL) : a) la sensibilité phonologique, b) les connaissances alphabétiques, c) l’identification des mots réels ou inventés, d) la sensibilité grammaticale, e) la compréhension des phrases et des textes. Nous rapportons les résultats d’une étude sur huit échelles de mesure représentant trois de ces domaines. Ces résultats attestent que la consistance interne des échelles est satisfaisante et que l’augmentation de la performance en fonction du niveau scolaire appuie la validité des concepts représentés par ces échelles. Nous concluons avec quelques observations sur le développement à venir.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.060
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.165
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0600.165
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des sciences de l éducationSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207