L’enseignement du fait religieux à l’école aide-t-il à être un(e) « bon(ne) citoyen(ne) » ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’enseignement relatif aux religions à l’école dans les sociétés démocratiques libérales contemporaines met en jeu des aspects fondamentaux de l’éducation à la citoyenneté (Parker et al., 2012; Jackson, 2019). Cela tient aux liens étroits de cet enseignement avec la pluralité des identités et les compétences interculturelles requises dans un monde globalisé (Giorda, 2014). Si aujourd’hui le religieux ressurgit au travers de configurations nouvelles et inédites, parallèlement et paradoxalement, l’analphabétisme religieux sévit parmi les nouvelles générations (Moore, 2007; Melloni, 2014). Comment l’enseignement relatif aux religions à l’école peut-il combler cet analphabétisme et éduquer les jeunes au vivre-ensemble et à la citoyenneté active? À partir de l’analyse du cas italien, cet article porte sur une étude 1 qui examine si la discipline de l’IRC – enseignement de la religion catholique – favorise l’alphabétisation religieuse en accord avec les valeurs de l’éducation à la citoyenneté active dans des contextes multireligieux et multiculturels.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".