La lecture interactive d'albums documentaires à la maternelle: regards sur les pratiques exemplaires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La lecture interactive, particulièrement celle des albums documentaires, est une pratique reconnue pour soutenir le développement langagier (Chlapana, 2016) et cognitif (Mantzicopoulos et Patrick, 2011) des enfants du préscolaire. Or, lorsque les enseignantes de maternelle font la lecture aux enfants, elles exploitent rarement ce type d’ouvrages (Yopp et Yopp, 2012). Pourtant, plusieurs auteurs relèvent des pratiques exemplaires pour exploiter adéquatement ces œuvres de littérature jeunesse en contexte de lecture interactive (Chlapana, 2016; Boudreau et Beaudoin, 2015). Cet article propose une recension des écrits quant aux pratiques recommandées à cet égard. Les pratiques répertoriées ont été classées en cinq catégories: 1) la planification de la lecture, 2) les interventions avant la lecture, 3) les interventions pendant la lecture, 4) les interventions après la lecture et 5) les activités complémentaires. Préalablement, il expose les apports de la lecture interactive d’albums documentaires auprès d’enfants d’âge préscolaire relevés par la littérature scientifique.
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 | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.008 |
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".