MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984114212 · doi:10.1606/1044-3894.3766

Critical Consciousness and Cross-Cultural/lntersectional Social Work Practice: A Case Analysis

2008· article· en· W1984114212 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFamilies in Society The Journal of Contemporary Social Services · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionCritical consciousnessSociologyPrivilege (computing)Agency (philosophy)Ethnic groupConsciousnessRefugeeMulticulturalismGender studiesPower (physics)Social workSocial psychologyPolitical sciencePsychologySocial scienceLawPoliticsPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social workers have an ethical responsibility to address the dynamics and consequences of oppression and to promote social justice. Working across cultures and identities requires expanding our comfort zones, owning our power and privilege, and engaging in active self-reflection that interrogates what we hold to be true. These are vital components of “critical consciousness” and critical approaches to practice. This paper presents a complex case example of a refugee Muslim family to articulate the processes that workers can use to deepen critical consciousness when working with clients. The authors describe ways to attend to the complex intersections (of gender, age, ethnicity, religion, immigration status, and socioeconomic status) in multicultural and socially just practice within complex agency and environmental contexts.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.357 · 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