LECTURE ANALYTIQUE ET VIDÉOPROJECTION : DU DIAPORAMA-SPECTACLE A L’INTERACTION COLLABORATIVE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’objet de cette étude est d’examiner l’évolution d’usages personnels de la vidéo-projection en classe de français, en lycée, dans le cadre de la lecture analytique, en partant de mes premiers diaporamas, qui datent de 2007 et se révèlent très magistraux et descendants, créant une fausse interactivité avec la classe. J’ai ensuite choisi de construire les diaporamas en classe, avec les élèves, en négociant par le dialogue le contenu des analyses que nous rédigions ensemble. Enfin, depuis deux ans, grâce à l’outil collaboratif Padlet, j’accrois la réelle participation des élèves, en partant de leurs réflexions spontanées, qui vont s’inscrire directement sur le tableau collectif autour du texte étudié. Ces différents usages de la vidéo-projection s’accompagnent donc au fil des ans d’un véritable renversement de ma posture d’enseignante, passant du face à face au côte à côte.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".