Struggles for Mutuality: Conceptualizing Hosts as Participants in International Service Learning in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have been working in volunteer abroad programming for over seven years. In this time, we have formed long-lasting and moving relationships with students from the global North who have been transformed by the experience of living and working with people in the global South, and those who have not. We have lived, worked, laughed, commiserated, and cried alongside host families who have welcomed these students into their homes, washed their laundry, tolerated their complaints, and included them in their family life and events. As colleagues and friends, this chapter and the broader study emerge out of many discussions we have had working in international service learning (ISL) about our concern with the exclusion of host families from the planning, implementation, and imagining of ISL in a way that is more than tokenistic. This chapter emerges out of a larger research project that we undertook in the summers of 2013 and 2014 in Ecuador, Honduras, the Dominican Republic, Ghana, and Rwanda. We used surveys to ask host families about their experiences during the founding decade of Intercordia Canada (2003-2013). Intercordia Canada is a small, Canadian ISL organization founded by Jean Vanier that fosters human solidarity by encouraging young Canadians to be morally responsive and develop a respect and appreciation for religious, cultural, and socio-economic diversity by living and working alongside others who are different. The three principles of the work include: ‘being with’ is more important than ‘doing for’ others; encountering our weakness and vulnerability can be the source of significant growth and connection; and the journey of learning is best made together (Intercordia, 2015). We have both worked with this organization over the last seven years-as mentors, as campus representatives, as program planners, and more. As such, we are invested in this particular model of ISL, but also in the vision of Intercordia that values and centers hosts in the vision of programming and in the collaborative organizational structure that has allowed for growth and change within the organization.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".