Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’auteur étudie la contribution de l’association française multilingue d’enseignants de langues vivantes APLV à la propagation de points de vue didactiques qui ont ensuite servi de point d’appui au développement d’idées actuelles dans le domaine de la didactique du plurilinguisme. Il indique également les modifications que ces points de vue ont connues depuis. Il traite des prises de position de l’APLV à propos des aspects suivants de la didactique et de la politique éducative des langues : l’éveil aux langues, la didactique intégrée des langues, la diversification de l’offre scolaire en langues, les buts de l’enseignement des langues ainsi que la conceptualisation, au sens de réflexion sur la langue. Il conclut en montrant comment les limitations de l’étude proposée conduisent à des simplifications en laissant de côté d’une part les différences de point de vue qui coexistaient au sein de l’association et d’autre part les itinéraires individuels des acteurs principaux.
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 | 0.012 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".