MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239279678 · doi:10.4000/reperes.1608

Le tournant éthique en didactique de la littérature

2018· paratext· fr· W4239279678 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRepères · 2018
Typeparatext
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicContemporary art, education, critique
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En 2015, les programmes d’enseignement français pour les cycles 3 et 4 assignent à l’enseignement de la littérature des enjeux littéraires et de formation personnelle. Parallèlement, les programmes d’enseignement moral et civique (en France) ou d’éthique et culture religieuse (au Québec) confèrent aux œuvres littéraires la possibilité de développer la pensée critique des élèves, leur responsabilité civique et leur réflexivité, sur les plans personnel et social. Ce numéro de Repères interroge cette évolution notable de la prescription institutionnelle relative aux enjeux éthiques de l’enseignement de la littérature et contribue à mieux en cerner les implications dans différents pays francophones, au primaire et au secondaire. Le « tournant éthique » en études littéraire, déjà ancien, jouit-il d’une réception renouvelée en didactique de la littérature ? Que signifie enseigner la littérature dans une intention éthique aujourd’hui ? Comment éviter l’utilisation moralisante, voire moralisatrice, de la littérature à l’école ? Comment articuler les valeurs analysables dans les œuvres, portées par chaque lecteur, (dé)construites dans les interactions en classe et prescrites par l’institution scolaire ? Qu’est-ce qui se dit et se tait, s’observe et se dissimule quand il s’agit d’éthique en classe de littérature ? Les auteurs abordent ces questions essentielles selon des perspectives épistémologiques, théoriques et praxéologiques croisées. In 2015, the French teaching programs for cycles 3 and 4 provide literary and personal training for the teaching of literature. At the same time, the programs of moral and civic education (in France) or ethics and religious culture (in Quebec) give literary works the opportunity to develop students' critical thinking, their civil responsibility and their reflexivity, in terms of personal and social skills. This issue of Repères questioned this evolution of institutional prescription relative to ethics for literary teaching and contribute to identify her implications in different French-speaking countries. Does the “ethical turn” in literary studies require a renewed interpretation in the field of teaching? What does it mean to teach literature in an ethical intention today? How to avoid the moralizing use of literature at school? How to articulate the analyzable values in the literary works, the values of each reader, the interaction about axiology in the classroom and the prescriptions of the school institution about moral education? What is said and silenced, observed and concealed when it comes to ethics in the class of literature? The authors address these essential questions according to the epistemological, theoretical, and praxeological perspectives crossed. En 2015, los programas docentes en Francia, para los ciclos 3 y 4, atribuyen a la enseñanza de la literatura unos desafíos literarios y de formación personal. Al mismo tiempo, los programas para la « enseñanza moral y cívica » (en Francia) o para la ética y cultura religiosa (en Québec) conceden a la literatura la posibilidad de desarrollar el pensamiento critico, la responsabilidad cívica, y la conciencia reflexive de los alumnos, a la vez en el plano personal y social. Este número de Repères pone en cuestión ésta notable evolución de los programas institucionales, con relación a los desafíos y retos éticos de la enseñanza de la literatura. Contribuye además a señalar sus implicaciones en diferentes países francófonos, en la escuela primaria y secundaria. ¿El « giro ético » (ethic turn) de los estudios literarios podría recibir una interpretación renovada en el campo de la didáctica de la literatura ? ¿Que significa hoy en día enseñar la literatura con una intención ética ? ¿Cómo evitar un uso moralista de la literature en la escuela ? ¿Cómo articular los valores que se pueden analizar en las obras, los que comparten los lectores, las que se construyen o se critican durante las interacciones en el curso, los que la institución escolar tiende a transmitir ? ¿Qué es lo que se dice, y se calla, se observa y se disimula cuando se trata de ética en el curso de literatura ? ¿Los autores tratan de ésos asuntos fundamentales con varias perspectivas cruzadas : epistemologicas, teóricas y prácticas.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.313 · 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