Pratiques, objets et finalités de collaboration en lien avec l’intégration des tablettes numériques dans une école secondaire | Practices, Objects and Collaboration Purposes Related to the Integration of Digital Tablets in a High School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bien que les technologies de l’information et de la communication (TIC) occupent une place de plus en plus prépondérante, tant au sein de la société que de l’école (Anderson, 2010), on remarque que leur intégration en contexte scolaire représente encore un défi de taille (Underwood et Dillon, 2011). Selon certains auteurs (Portelance, 2011; Desgagné, 1997), la collaboration constituerait un vecteur pour transformer les pratiques éducatives. Comment la collaboration peut-elle contribuer à ce changement que représente l’intégration des TIC? Les résultats d’une recherche-action, menée depuis trois ans de concert avec une école secondaire ayant pour objectif d’intégrer la tablette numérique, permet de mettre en lumière des pratiques, des objets et des finalités de collaboration qui ont émergé entre les différents acteurs, favorisant ainsi l’implantation de cet outil technologique. Although Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) play an increasingly predominant role (Anderson, 2010), their integration in school context is still a challenge (Underwood and Dillon, 2011). According to Portelance (2011) and Desgagné (1997), collaboration is one vector that can be used to transform educational practices. How can collaboration contribute to the ICT integration process into our schools? The results of an action research, conducted for three years along with a high school that aims to integrate digital tablet, allows to highlighting practices, objects and collaboration purposes that emerged between actors, therefore facilitating the implementation of this technological tool.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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".