MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400919286 · doi:10.56105/cjsae.v15i2.1916

L'@lphabétisation et les technologies de l'information à l'aube du nouveau millénaire: nouvelle conception, nouvelles perspectives

2001· article· fr· W4400919286 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Thierry Karsenti

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education · 2001
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Ce texte à caractère théorique traite d'abord d'une nouvelle conception de l'@lphabétisation qui intègre les technologies de l'information et de la communication (TIC). Nous présentons ensuite un bref survol de la situation de l'alphabétisation au Québec et au Canada afin de montrer qu'il s'agit bien d'un problème actuel qui sévit, en silence, au coeur même des sociétés dites «développées». Nous abordons ensuite l'analphabétisme informatique, un nouveau problème social. Puis, nous teutons d'illustrer des avantages incontestables inhérents à une intégration pédagogique efficiente des technologies : une motivation et un apprentissage accrus pour les apprenants; des impacts positifs importants sur les apprentissages en lecture, en écriture, en calcul et en utilisation des technologies. This text, of a theoretical nature, first presents a new conception of literacy (called l'@phabetisation) which integrates information and communication technologies (ICT). Then, an overview is given of the context of literacy in Quebec and in Canada, in order to show that illiteracy is indeed a contemporary problem that festers in silence at the heart of so-called developed countries. Next, technological illiteracy is examined as a new social challenge. Following this, the undeniable advantages inherent in the efficient pedagogical integration of technologies are illustrated: increased motivation and learning for the students; significant positive effects on learning in terms of reading, writing, numeracy, and the use of technologies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.021
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal for the Study of Adult EducationSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207