MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971060692 · doi:10.1080/17525098.2012.721166

A challenged professional identity: the struggles of new social workers in China

2012· article· en· W1971060692 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Liu, Ching Man Lam, Miu Chung Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueChina Journal of Social Work · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial workPublic relationsIdentity (music)Social changeSocial positionChinaSociologySocial identity theoryPolitical scienceSocial groupSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports the findings of a qualitative study of how 28 new social workers in China experienced challenges during the early formulation of their professional social work identity in the workplace. Through social work training at the school, they had been taught that some key social work values were core elements of their social work professional identity. These values have informed their daily practice. However, negative experiences in the emerging social work field in China have hampered not only the advancement of their long term commitment to social work, but also have constantly weakened their fragile professional identity. In light of these findings, the paper proposes that universities, social work organizations and governments should work together to promote a better environment for new social workers and to help them continue in the field. To obtain official support and public recognition towards social work, to delineate the role, responsibilities and authority of this profession in the social service system, the creation of a job induction plan and a professional supervision system are essential for future social work development in China.

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)0.008
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0360.021
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations56
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChina Journal of Social WorkSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207