Lire et interpréter des tableaux anciens avec des élèves du primaire au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article est issu d’une recherche exploratoire proposant une démarche interdisciplinaire d’analyse et d’interprétation des œuvres d’art en classe d’univers social, en 4 e et 5 e années du primaire (équivalent du CM1 et du CM2 français) au Québec. Cette démarche accorde un double statut aux œuvres d’art, soit d’objets esthétiques et de documents historiques, dans le but d’amener les enseignants et leurs élèves à faire un travail interprétatif de type historien qui prend en compte la dimension esthétique des œuvres d’art. La recherche consistait en une séance de modélisation en classe (n = 4), suivie d’un exercice d’analyse d’aquarelles, qui nous a permis d’observer comment les élèves combinent la lecture sensible et la lecture historienne lors de leur travail interprétatif.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 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".