L’As du Lycée, une contribution à la connaissance des droits de l’enfant congolais ? La réception de la série télévisée dans le milieu scolaire kinois.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article s’interroge sur la fonction jouée par les médias en général et les séries télévisées pour enfants en particulier dans l’apprentissage des droits des enfants en République Démocratique du Congo. En partant d’une situation contextuelle donnée, notre réflexion se base sur deux méthodes : une étude qualitative du discours véhiculé par la fiction L’As du lycée d’une part et une étude de réception d’autre part. L’analyse de contenu s’intéresse aux trois épisodes les plus cités par les adolescentes interrogées. L’étude de réception s’est focalisée sur un échantillon d’adolescentes de Kinshasa. Les résultats de recherches montrent que la série véhicule bien des savoirs liés à la question du droit des enfants. Les entretient prouvent que les adolescentes perçoivent certains éléments mais qu’elles ont besoin d’un accompagnement pour pouvoir réellement relier ces éléments au système légal. L’article montre que la série télévisée pourrait être considérée comme un support à l’apprentissage des droits de l’enfant auprès des téléspectateurs, mais que pour être totalement efficace le programme doit être accompagné de séances pédagogiques. Abstract: This paper questions the function played by media in general and series for children in particular in the teaching of children rights in Democratic Republic of the Congo. Our reflection is based on two methods: a qualitative analysis of the discourse carried by the fiction L’As du lycée on one hand, and a reception study on the other hand. The content analysis is focused on the three episodes most quoted by a sample of teenage girls of Kinshasa. The results show that the series is indeed carrying some knowledge linked to the children rights. The interviews demonstrate that teenagers do perceive certain facts, however they need to be guided to really be able to connect these elements to the legal system. The paper demonstrates that the series could be considered as a learning medium but, to be fully efficient, the program must be completed by pedagogical sessions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".