La coalition des organismes communautaires du Québec (1985-1991) : d’une pratique démocratique à un mimétisme adhocratique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir d'une synthèse historique, l'auteur identifie les conditions d'émergence et les fondements communautaires et politiques spécifiques à l'action de la Coalition des organismes communautaires du Québec, en privilégiant le mode de fonctionnement, les constats collectifs, la forme de pratiques démocratiques, les actions menées, les revendications et l'identification de certains enjeux politiques. Dans un second temps, il dresse un bilan critique général de cette expérience présentée comme un événement unique de solidarité intersectorielle dans l'histoire du mouvement communautaire et populaire. Il s'agit d'une évaluation globale portant non seulement sur l'impact des principales actions réalisées par la COCQ, mais aussi sur le moment de rupture de la solidarité intersectorielle en 1991. À partir d'un point de vue critique, l'auteur formule certaines hypothèses afin d'expliquer ce retour aux pratiques stratégiques fragmentées en tables et en coalitions sectorielles.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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".