The reception of the traditional tale in the Primary classes and in the Training Centers of Teachers. Active readings to return to the tale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article has as its main objective to analyze the reception of the traditional story tale in the readers and readers of the 21st Century to detect the elements that produce in them the greatest challenge in order to propose a way to return them to the story based on dialogic reading, rewriting and the textual recycling. For that, after a bibliographical review on the reception of the account at the end of the 20th Century and the first quarter of the 21st Century, activities have been designed to carry out, on the one hand, in classes at the Faculty of Education and, on the other hand, in primary third level classes. Thus, by means of a qualitative methodology and research-action, it has been possible to gather information on the reception of the traditional tale in university and medium-level students. The conclusion to which we have come is that what the greatest challenge generates in relation to the traditional account are cultural markers left by the collectors, but that current readers and female readers, by means of an active and creative reading, are perfectly capable of detecting and modify these markers respecting the structure and conventions of the traditional tale.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".