Conditions favorables à l’engagement communautaire : évaluation participative de l’adaptation culturelle d’un programme de développement des filles au Sénégal, Afrique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les programmes pour le développement des jeunes se fondent sur les forces des jeunes et les facteurs environnementaux favorisant leur résilience. La recherche adopte une approche qualitative et participative, reposant sur des entretiens individuels, des groupes de discussion, et l’analyse participative. Les résultats révèlent que les participants jugent pertinent d’intégrer des éléments culturels et religieux (tels que la langue locale et les pratiques religieuses) dans la mise en œuvre de ce programme, et que ces éléments ont créé des conditions favorables à l’engagement communautaire. De plus, la combinaison des sources de données a permis de formaliser et mettre à l’épreuve l’approche axée sur la culture et la religion du programme étudié. Nous suggérons que cette étude permet de mieux cerner la responsabilité de l’évaluateur dans la mise en pratique d’une évaluation sensible à la culture lorsqu’il travail.
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 | 0.059 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".