La compétence scripturale : une revue de littérature pour actualiser sa modélisation didactique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article a comme objectif de définir la compétence scripturale (CS), dans une perspective didactique, selon des recherches récentes mobilisant ce concept modélisé par Dabène, 1987; 1991 et Reuter, 1996, ses deux auteurs fondateurs. Une revue systématique de littérature a été menée (Pati et Lorusso, 2011). L’analyse des textes (n = 64) a permis la proposition d’une synthèse des avancées dans les recherches scripturales et une réflexion terminologique autour du concept de CS mobilisé dans les recherches actuelles en didactique de l’écrit. Notre contribution permet de définir la CS, mais également de proposer un modèle didactique de ce concept. Ce modèle évoque la complexité des relations au sein de la CS tout en permettant l’établissement de repères communs pour les chercheurs, les praticiens et les apprenants-scripteurs autour du concept de CS.
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 | 0.020 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".