L’élève qui a des incapacités intellectuelles et la lecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article est une revue de littérature ayant pour thème l’interaction entre la complexité de la tâche qu’est la lecture du français et les caractéristiques des élèves qui ont des incapacités intellectuelles. Pour ce faire, nous avons utilisé une méthode d’analyse de contenu pour examiner cette interaction au regard du modèle explicatif duProcessus de production du handicapproposé par Fougeyrollas, Cloutier, Bergeron, Côté et St-Michel (1998). Selon ce processus, des éléments environnementaux, en interaction avec les déficiences ou incapacités de la personne peuvent devenir des obstacles à la réalisation d’une activité la plaçant ainsi en situation de handicap. Nous pourrons donc montrer comment les processus complexes de lecture risquent de placer la personne ayant des incapacités intellectuelles en situation de handicap, lorsque ces processus de lecture sont en interaction avec les caractéristiques cognitives et non cognitives du lecteur.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 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".