MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2253148952 · doi:10.5206/cie-eci.v44i2.9275

Utiliser la force du nombre pour favoriser le développement de la fluidité de lecture en contexte subsaharien

2015· article· fr· W2253148952 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Élisabeth Boily, Chantal Ouellet, Catherine Turcotte

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative and International Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’enseignement de la lecture au primaire s’effectue dans des conditions difficiles au Burkina Faso, ce qui affecte sans contredit l’apprentissage de cette habileté nécessaire à la réussite scolaire et à l’épanouissement personnel. Chez les élèves des premiers cycles du primaire, la fluidité de lecture se développe difficilement. Cette recherche a pour but d’implanter un programme de lecture orale répétée et assistée et d’évaluer les effets de cette intervention sur le développement de la fluidité d’élèves provenant d’une classe à large effectif et hétérogène de CE1 au Burkina Faso. Une évaluation de la fluidité a été effectuée auprès de 94 élèves avant et après l’intervention. Les résultats indiquent que ce programme a un effet positif sur le développement de la fluidité des élèves faibles et très faibles. Ce programme de lecture orale répétée et assistée est prometteur puisqu’il constitue une première tentative d’implantation d’une intervention visant le travail systématique sur la fluidité dans un contexte de classe à large effectif au Burkina Faso.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative and International EducationSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207