MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1848515701 · doi:10.1017/s1326011100004014

Centring Aboriginal Worldviews in Social Work Education

2005· article· en· W1848515701 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cyndy Baskin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Australian Journal of Indigenous Education · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyWork (physics)Relevance (law)Indigenous educationColonialismPedagogyDecolonizationTheme (computing)IndigenousSocial workSocial sciencePolitical sciencePoliticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As Aboriginal peoples gain more access to schools of social work, the academy needs to respond to their educational needs. This involves incorporating Aboriginal worldviews and research methodologies into social work education. This paper focuses on one definition of worldviews according to Aboriginal epistemology and implements an anti-colonial discursive framework in its analysis of education. It also critiques both the role of social work in the lives of Aboriginal peoples and the goals of social work education. Through the findings of a recent research project with Aboriginal social work students in Ontario, Canada, it raises key components that need to be addressed in the academy and provides ways in which this can be achieved. The overall theme flowing through this paper is that of decolonisation whereby reclamation of the belief that all peoples of the world have much to offer one another and life is a reciprocal process comes to the surface. In addition, the paper stresses the importance of this content being taught to all social work students and its relevance to all areas of Indigenous humanities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.050
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.373 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Australian Journal of Indigenous EducationSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207