Appropriation de tablettes tactiles par des étudiants de la filière « Bibliothèques et Documentation »
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[étude] Dans un contexte de développement des supports numériques nomades, l’équipe pédagogique de la licence professionnelle « Gestion et médiation des ressources documentaires » (Université Rennes 2) a mis en place une enquête qualitative auprès d’étudiants équipés en tablettes tactiles afin d’analyser les modalités et les enjeux de l’appropriation de cet outil en situation de formation. Menée par six enseignants-chercheurs et professionnels de la documentation – Catherine Daniel, Solenn Dupas, Marie-Armelle Ni-Camussi, Bertrand Piechaczyk, Florence Thiault, Jean-Paul Thomas – l’étude porte sur les usages personnels, pédagogiques et professionnels de la tablette. Elle aborde notamment les pratiques de veille et de communication, la lecture, la consultation de vidéo et de musique, la création de contenus et l’utilisation de jeux. L’expérimentation a fait l’objet d’une enquête qualitative. Il s’agit ainsi de voir dans quelle mesure la mise à disposition de tablettes peut contribuer à développer la culture numérique des étudiants.
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 | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".