Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce livre est le temoignage vibrant d'un cheminement pour baliser une ethique de l'accompagnement sensible. Il invite tous les accompagnateurs a prendre la mesure des enjeux ethiques et relationnels qui traversent toute pratique d'accompagnement. L'auteure, Kinesitherapeute de formation, actuellement praticienne et enseignante en fasciatherapie et en psychopedagogie perceptive, questionne sa pratique professionnelle et son experience personnelle pour degager les conditions d'une relation trans-formatrice au sein de cette forme d'accompagnement. Sa rencontre avec la psychosociologie au Quebec lui a offert des outils d'une fecondite edifiante pour passer du cheminer vers soi au cheminer avec l'autre vers soi et vers le monde. Dans cette recherche, l'auteure deploie une philosophie et une pratique d'accompagnement sensible centrees sur les rapports au corps, a la personne mais aussi a la relation. Le modele d'accompagnement propose a la fois formateur et soignant, revisite la trans-formation de soi et du rapport aux autres et au monde par le renouvellement des pratiques relationnelles. L'accompagnement sensible y constitue une ethique, une autopoiese, une maieutique et une dialogique.
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.007 |
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".