Concevoir des robots pour développer la créativité des élèves ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article propose un ensemble de stratégies visant à développer la créativité des élèves dans le domaine de la conception technique en activités créatrices et manuelles (ACM). Plusieurs disciplines sont convoquées afin de provoquer une démarche interdisciplinaire intégrant le français, le design d'objets (robots) et la programmation informatique. Le modèle théorique de John Didier et Denis Leuba resituant l'objet produit dans un processus de socialisation, permet d'intégrer l'objet technique dans un cadre plus large, en l'occurrence ses multiples usages sociaux possibles. Dans l'expérimentation analysée, le robot devient un élément d'un processus de communication aboutissant dans la réalisation d'une pièce de théâtre. L'objet technique n'est plus ainsi réduit à un artefact matériel, mais il devient instrument de communication de sens, en d'autres termes, il devient en quelque sorte un média.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".