MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799398867 · doi:10.3406/reper.2007.2754

Les difficultés de lecture des collégiens en SEGPA : évaluation et remédiation

2007· article· en· W2799398867 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRepères · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Language Learning Methods
Canadian institutionsFrancophone University Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPedagogyValuation (finance)Reading (process)Meaning (existential)Mathematics educationLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reading diffi culties of segpa pupils : evaluation and remediation The contribution uses a review of investigations about the reading diffi culties of collégiens (1st cycle, secondary). We develop some of them -more particularly the researches conducted by the ministry of Education in 1997 (in Dossiers de l’évaluation, n° 112, 1999)-to expound the first outcomes of a current research aiming to describe the reading difficulties or incapacities of 6ème SEGPA pupils (1st year, special cycle secondary, for pupils with special educational needs) and suggest adjusted (re)learning procedures. Thus we show that these pupils are often considerably far behind and the majority of them fail most of the 6eme national evaluation tests in French. They show a wide diversity of (non) performances which goes from (i) pupils who cannot decipher the most basic words and who often keep to logographic strategies ; (ii) pupils who just skim through texts and “imagine” probable contents at the risk of multiple misinterpretations ; (iii) more numerous pupils who are taken up by elementary deciphering procedures which therefore prevent them from having access to a global representation of the meaning of the texts. The study describes the few reading skills actually mastered by these pupils and, by comparison it defines the procedures they need to construct, reconstruct or complement in the graphophonological, orthographical, semanticosyntactic and discursive fields. We suggest adapted teaching strategies which should take the embryonic procedures of these pupils into account and include (i) processes with a metacognitive and metalinguistic objective ; (ii) lesson plans integrating the linguistic elements depending on the specific way texts are written ; (iii) adjusted and varied remediations aiming to make the recognition of words automatic ; (iiii) reading projects related to the text writing activity and the objectives of the other school subjects taught in collège. the risk of multiple misinterpretations ; (iii) more numerous pupils who are taken up by elementary deciphering procedures which therefore prevent them from having access to a global representation of the meaning of the texts. The study describes the few reading skills actually mastered by these pupils and, by comparison it defi nes the procedures they need to construct, reconstruct or complement in the graphophonological, orthographical, semanticosyntactic and discursive fi elds. We suggest adapted teaching strategies which should take the embryonic procedures of these pupils into account and include (i) processes with a metacognitive and metalinguistic objective ; (ii) lesson plans integrating the linguistic elements depending on the specifi c way texts are written ; (iii) adjusted and varied remediations aiming to make the recognition of words automatic ; (iiii) reading projects related to the text writing activity and the objectives of the other school subjects taught in collège.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.368 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it