MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970107998 · doi:10.7202/1061842ar

L’apprentissage de l’orthographe par la lecture-écriture : combien d’occurrences pour favoriser l’acquisition?

2019· article· fr· W2970107998 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nathalie Chaves

Bibliographic record

VenueNouveaux cahiers de la recherche en éducation · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWriting and Handwriting Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Il se dégage un consensus dans la littérature scientifique sur l’importance du décodage dans l’acquisition des connaissances orthographiques. Ainsi, l’hypothèse de l’autoapprentissage par la lecture postule qu’un bon décodage permet de mémoriser la forme orthographique. D’autres études mesurent l’impact du traitement visuel et de la graphomotricité dans l’apprentissage de l’orthographe lexicale. Que ce soit pour l’un ou l’autre de ces facteurs le nombre de présentations ne fait pas l’unanimité. L’objectif de notre recherche est de mesurer l’effet de dix lectures-écritures sur un apprentissage de l’orthographe lexicale chez des enfants de 2 e à la 5 e année de primaire. Les résultats révèlent qu’à partir de la cinquième lecture-écriture, le bénéfice apporté par chacune des lectures-écritures supplémentaires reste stable.

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 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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNouveaux cahiers de la recherche en éducationSame topicWriting and Handwriting EducationFrench-language works237,207