La théorie et la construction des convictions en travail social
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le travail social est habituellement aux prises avec une rhétorique qui divise la réalité de l'action professionnelle en « théorie » et « pratique », et qui renvoie la première aux limbes du non-pertinent: « la pratique » semble pouvoir vivre sans elle. Un facteur qui contribue possiblement à cette exclusion de la théorie du monde de la quotidienneté professionnelle pourrait être l'identification qu'on en fait avec les discours de légitimation de la Science, de l'État et de l'Individu - discours qui renvoient le travail social à des structures de pouvoir qu'il respecte à distance, tout en s'en méfiant. Les perspectives constructivistes offrent des stratégies de décodification qui illuminent ce rapport aliéné d'une profession avec la recherche de sa propre rationalité.
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 | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.108 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".