Reimagining Field Education in Social Work: The Promise Unveiled
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current wave of neo-liberalism in Canada has driven our universities to retreat from their responsibilities as public institutions, accountable to their communities. In this paper we present a case study of field education in Canada and discuss the implications of the neoliberal academy on social work field education. On the basis of our experience as faculty consultants of BSW and MSW students, and coming from a school of social work that embraces an anti-oppression perspective as its guiding philosophy, we undertake a reconceptualization exercise in which we re-imagine field education. We politicize field education as a site with transformative possibilities. We describe the principles and processes that inform our reconceptualization and offer an example of how this might be realized in practice. This paper contributes towards developing new knowledge that unveils the promise of transformative change through a re-imagination of field education.
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 | 0.033 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.148 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.029 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".