La Figure de Terry Fox : Handicap et Performance et les Conséquences Pour l’Éducation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article analyse la figure de Terry Fox par rapport à une reproduction idéologique d’un certain discours sur le handicap et sur l’infirmité à l’école. L’auteur reprend l’exemple du personnage de Terry Fox qui met en lumière certains aspects sociaux et culturels par rapport au handicap. L’analyse montre que la visibilité du handicap de Terry Fox est liée à sa performance physique et à des courants philanthropiques qui ont émergé dans les années 1980 et qui se sont maintenus, voire renforcés, depuis. Le handicap devient supportable quand il peut être « surmonté » et associé à de grandes causes qui transcendent le handicap. Ainsi, en enseignant de façon naïve l’histoire de Terry Fox et en encourageant la participation aux Courses Terry Fox dans les écoles, on renforce et on rend légitime un certain discours néolibéral qui cherche à former le citoyen consommateur individualiste capable de maîtriser son propre corps et son sort.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".