Déstabiliser la multimodalité : réinventer et revisiter de nouveaux futurs sémiotiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article interroge l’histoire de la littératie multimodale afin de réimaginer de nouveaux devenirs sémiotiques en éducation. Il aborde l’interdisciplinarité de la multimodalité pour expliciter ses caractéristiques, ses modes et ses temporalités. L’histoire de la littéracie multimodale sous-tend des façons de réimaginer des avenirs en littératie, qu’importe le type de communication ou genre textuel. Pour les étudier, l’article discute de certains termes clés de la multimodalité, dont les signes, les modes, les temporalités et ses effets multiplicatifs, lesquels permettent de naviguer les sens contenus dans les textes et les oeuvres. Réimaginer les devenirs sémiotiques de la multimodalité engage un dialogue sur les effets, les émotions et les mondes immersifs possibles dans les genres numériques, de même que sur les potentialités des modes et compositions modales. Pour accompagner cette exploration, l’article mobilise des oeuvres contemporaines et de travaux menés dans des écoles secondaires pour mieux percevoir l’apport de la multimodalité en éducation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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.
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".