La question du « réel et son double » dans les créations théâtrales au secondaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, Hamel examines the question of reality and its double in the context of theatrical creation at the high school level. The play and its public performance are seen as reality’s double and the character, that of its creator. Both doubles are apprehended, idealized, contested, opposed, and desired, as well as referential and autoreferential. How does the double emerge from creative work, and how is it significant in students’ educational and artistic experiences as well as their journey as spectators? Hamel’s study was carried out in the context of her doctoral work and is based on a content analysis of three theatrical creations (texts, scenarios, characters, stagings, and performances) as well as a series of semi-structured interviews with six students (now 32 to 36 years old, 16 to 20 years after the fact). What deeper significance did this creative experience have for these students as they prepared to enter adulthood? Hamel concludes that these learning experiences can have effects on the students’ very existence.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".