Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESUME. Le concept de la representation sociale et les ecrits sur la litteratie ont servi de cadre conceptuel pour examiner la representation de lalitteratie chez les intervenants d'un projet pedagogique en classe d'accueil. A travers l'analyse des entrevues avec les intervenants, il est demontre que ces derniets ont construit une representation de la litteratie constituee de deux discours divergents: un discours scolaire, qui conduit a envisager la litteratie comme une habilete individuelle developpee a l'ecole; et un discours social, qui associe la litteratie a des phenomenes sociaux depassant le seul contexte scolaire. La conclusion envisage les facteurs contextuels lies au processus de changement qui ont pousse les intervenants a s'associer de facon strategique au discours social sur la litteratie. THE REPRESENTATION OF LlTERACY IN AN EDUCATION PROJECT ABSTRACT. The concept of social representation and the writings on literacy have been used as a conceptual framework to examine the representation ofliteracy among participants in an education project in classes d'accueiL Through the analysis of interview results, it has been demonstrated that the participants have constructed a representation of literacy made up of two different discourses: an academic discourse that tends to see literacy as an individual ability developed in school, and a social discourse which associates literacy to social phenomena that go beyond the academic context. The conclusion considers the contextual factors linked to the change process that have led the participants to associate themselves strategically with the social discourse on literacy.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".