Perspective sociomatérielle sur la pédagogie des multilittératies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, nous travaillons avec des théories sociomatérielles pour proposer de nouvelles pistes de réflexion sur la notion de design, centrale dans le texte fondateur du New London Group (1996), « A pedagogy of multiliteracies : Designing social futures ». Nous portons un regard réflexif et critique sur les liens entre l’aspect intentionnel de nos plans de recherche et d’enseignement et la nature spontanée des relations qui ressortent au cours d’un atelier de création numérique d’histoires multimodales et bilingues. Pour ce faire, nous présentons un récit narratif qui suit le design pédagogique et le déroulement de l’atelier. Des moments de réflexion théorique qui mobilisent les concepts d’agencement, d’affect, de rhizome et d’espaces lisses et striés sont intégrés dans ce récit. De ces réflexions émerge une pédagogie des multilittératies sociomatérielle différente qui s’ouvre au caractère imprévisible d’interruptions productives qui ne sont pas toujours prises en compte lors de la planification de la recherche et de l’enseignement/apprentissage.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".