Désinstitutionnalisation, «communautarisation» des services et formation des intervenants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The "deinstitutionalization" of services and their community uses imply important modifications in our professional practices. The citizen, the parent and the community resources become necessary partners in the care of the person maladjusted to his family and community environment. This change means that our social values have to undergo important modifications so that parents and citizens are recognized the abilities and resources to assist the actions of the professional services'networks. We have to study what professional abilities need to be developed in the different community environment to respect and give value to these new resources of the human and social ecology. A pedagogy of services has to be thought of in order to prepare both parent and citizen to be responsible for certain needs in the family and community. The training and the specialization of the personnel is in need of pedagogical strategies that will trancend the theoretical knowledge and will take account the environment's know how. In other words, strategies that will blend the theoretical knowledge with the Empirical one. Two training experiences are presented: one implies the initial training (Research project and in the house intervention) and the other is involved with the training of network's helpers (Community integrated services). Those experiences are two among others which illustrate the need to define the relationship between power and knowledge in order to help the growth of true institutional alternatives in education, psychiatry, social work. Finally, we should ask what type of society facilitates the collaboration between alternative professional resources and mutual aid?
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 | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".