Le rapport à la bande dessinée d’enseignantes et enseignants de français au secondaire suisse romand : conceptions et pratiques en interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette contribution vise à examiner le rapport à la bande dessinée d’enseignantes et enseignants de français du secondaire suisse romand. Une recherche collaborative, menée avec quatre personnes participantes, a permis de mettre en évidence l’évolution d’un tel rapport, aux différentes étapes d’une collaboration centrée sur la planification et la mise en oeuvre d’une séquence d’enseignement portant sur la bande dessinée. Cet article examine les interrelations qui caractérisent les différents plans et dimensions du rapport à la bande dessinée, et notamment des discordances qui émergent, par exemple entre les plans personnel et didactique ou encore entre les dimensions affective, praxéologique et conceptuelle. L’examen de ces interrelations aboutit à la formalisation de la notion de «rapport à la bande dessinée».
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".