Du récit de vie en voyage au carnet de voyage : un nouveau dispositif de formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’Institut régional du travail social Normandie-Caen a participé à une recherche franco-québécoise visant à identifier les effets et les enjeux des mobilités internationales pour études. Pour ce faire, il a contribué à recueillir les récits de vie en voyage de seize jeunes intervenants sociaux ayant effectué un stage de formation au Québec et enquêté auprès des accueillants de ces stagiaires internationaux. Aujourd’hui, le récit de voyage ne porte plus sur l’exploration d’un monde inconnu, mais sur une expérience vécue qui se compose de tous les ingrédients d’une vie ailleurs : voyage certes, formation bien sûr, mais aussi logement, alimentation, santé, rencontres, loisirs. Cet article présentera les principales conclusions des études existantes, la méthodologie retenue ainsi que les principaux résultats obtenus et, pour conclure, proposera la mise en place d’un carnet de voyage comme outil d’expression, de partage, de confrontation, de comparaison, ou encore de transfert de compétences.
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 | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".