Pour une approche interculturelle dans l’étude de la relation entre les bénévoles et les communautés hôtes dans le bénévolat international
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les écrits sur la relation entre les bénévoles et les communautés hôtes dans le bénévolat international sont partagés entre deux postures opposées. La première, enthousiaste, soutient que le bénévolat international favorise un meilleur rapprochement interculturel que le tourisme. La seconde, critique, y met de l’avant la reproduction des rapports de pouvoir postcoloniaux. Pour surpasser cette opposition, cet article propose un cadre théorique interculturel, inspiré de la philosophie herméneutique de Gadamer, des approches systémiques des relations humaines, de l’ethnographie de la communication et de la sociolinguistique interactionnelle. Pour illustrer l’apport de celui-ci, une étude de cas sur la relation entre les stagiaires et leurs familles d’accueil dans les stages Québec Sans Frontières au Sénégal sera présentée. Celle-ci mettra en lumière trois dynamiques concomitantes dans cette relation : la (co)production de savoirs culturels, la négociation de nouveaux systèmes de communication hybrides et temporaires et le développement de savoir-faire interculturels
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 | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".