Voluntariado: perspectivas de los estudiantes de desarrollo internacional
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo examina las perspectivas variadas del 'voluntariado' a través de un enfoque de investigación.Para terminar esta investigación, un grupo de estudiantes de los estudios de desarrollo internacional (EDI) en la Universidad de Trent funcionó como participantes de investigación.El campo de EDI es muy interdisciplinario y muchas veces hay discrepancias entre perspectivas porque los estudiantes vienen de diferentes antecedentes académicos, por lo que los estudiantes de EDI son candidatos excelentes para una investigación como ésta.A cada estudiante se le pidió a crear un 'mapa mental' para expresar su propia definición del voluntariado.Los datos recogidos se utilizó para ilustrar cómo las percepciones del voluntariado comparan y contrastan, particularmente a las opiniones de la autora.Esta investigación se amplió aún más, examinando cómo factores como la edad y el género afectan las percepciones del voluntariado.
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 | 0.030 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".