PROGETTARE PERCORSI “VERTICALI” SULL’ARGOMENTAZIONE, TRA MODELLI DESCRITTIVI E PROPOSTE DIDATTICHE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’argomentazione è una pratica complessa e, allo stesso tempo, cruciale per il nostro agire (sociale) quotidiano: saper argomentare rientra, infatti, tra i principali obiettivi da raggiungere alla fine del percorso scolastico. A tal fine, diventa imprescindibile la realizzazione di un curricolo verticale che preveda un iter graduale di avvicinamento all’atto argomentativo (e ai suoi processi costitutivi) e che, dalla scuola primaria, in una prospettiva di continuità organica e sistematica, accompagni il discente fino all’esame finale del secondo ciclo. Considerando la dimensione testuale (e la pratica di interazione con la multiformità dei testi argomentativi) il filo conduttore dell’intero percorso, dopo aver illustrato i principi e i modelli teorici utili alla definizione della struttura argomentativa e dei dispositivi linguistici su cui si regge, con questo lavoro si prova ad avanzare una serie di proposte didattiche concrete da poter sviluppare anche in aula. Designing “vertical” paths on argumentation, between descriptive models and teaching proposals Argumentation is a complex practice and, at the same time, crucial for our (social) daily interaction: being able to argue is one of the main objectives to reach at the end of the school career. To this end, it becomes essential to create a vertical curriculum that provides a gradual approach to the act of argumentation (and its constituent processes) and that, from elementary school, in a perspective of organic and systematic continuity, accompanies the learner until the final exam of the second cycle. Considering the textual dimension (and the practice of interaction with the multiformity of argumentative texts) as the guiding thread of the entire course, after illustrating the principles and theoretical models useful for the definition of the argumentative structure and the linguistic devices on which it is based, this paper attempts to suggest a series of concrete didactic proposals that can also be developed in the classroom.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.004 |
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".