The Social Work Research Group/NASW Research Section/Council on Social Work Research, 1949-1965: An Emerging Research Identity in the American Profession
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To determine major themes and significance of the Social Work Research Group (SWRG), founded in 1949. Methods Archival research, principally at Social Welfare History Archives, University of Minnesota; oral historical interviews of key informants. Results The Social Work Research Group (SWRG), founded in 1949, fostered research within the profession by creating an organization representing and promoting social work research, advancing the place of research in teaching and scholarship, and establishing what ultimately became Social Work Abstracts. It was one of seven organizations leading to the 1955 creation of the National Association of Social Workers (NASW). Retaining NASW status, the SWRG (renamed NASW Research Section in 1955 and then Council on Social Work Research in 1963) moved from an earlier preoccupation with membership criteria and the place of research within the profession to conceptualizing and promoting research as an established social work method. Conclusion In doing so, the SWRG laid groundwork for the contemporary social work research movement.
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 | 0.032 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".