CRAYON OU CLAVIER ? EFFETS DE L’OUTIL D’ÉCRITURE SUR LES PERFORMANCES GRAPHOMOTRICES ET RÉDACTIONNELLES D’ÉLÈVES DE SIXIÈME ANNÉE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
De nos jours, le crayon côtoie le clavier obligeant la maitrise par l’élève du script ou de la cursive et de la saisie au clavier. Même si leur automatisation favorise l’écriture de textes, peu d’attention est portée à ces modalités d’écriture. Cette situation a motivé la réalisation d’une étude comparant les performances (graphomotrices, rédactionnelles) d’élèves de 6 e année (N= 84) en fonction de l’outil d’écriture (crayon, clavier). Les résultats aux tâches d’écriture (écriture de l’alphabet [1 min] ; écriture d’un résumé) révèlent que le clavier favoriserait la vitesse d’écriture (groupes script et cursive) et la production de textes plus longs et mieux détaillés (groupe cursive). Ces résultats suggèrent donc que le clavier serait favorable aux performances rédactionnelles.
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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".