Rapports aux textes virtuels en formation de lettres : vers une nouvelle écriture professionnelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La littératie étendue correspond à des écritures générant la gestion de plusieurs contraintes. Les textes numérisés et les hypertextes exigent du scripteur des macrohabiletés textuelles et discursives qui nécessitent des formations. Un rapide historique rappelle les éléments principaux de cette révolution et leurs conséquences dans le domaine scolaire. La rupture est également abordée en interrogeant les enjeux pragmatiques et énonciatifs des hypertextes. Les comportements des enseignants de lettres face à cette nouvelle réalité professionnelle sont appréhendés au moyen d’un questionnaire. Il s’avère que les enseignants ont peu investi ce domaine. Les résultats sont discutés par une mise en perspective anthropologique entre technique et écriture et en s’interrogeant également sur l’enseignement de l’écriture de haut niveau en milieu universitaire.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".