Bibliographic record
Abstract
English Utilizing data derived from Indian field instructors, Indian administrators and students, this article considers the experience of Canadian social work practicum students in India within the conceptual framework of Bhabha's Third Space. It concludes with implications for social work international field education. French En s'inspirant de données provenant de superviseurs, d'administrateurs et d'étudiants indiens, cette étude se penche sur l'expérience d'étudiants canadiens en stage de travail social en Inde, et qui se sont inspirés du cadre conceptuel du troisième espace de Bhabha. Cette étude tire des conclusions pour l'enseignement du travail social international. Spanish Se considera la experiencia de trabajo de campo de estudiantes canadienses en la India. Se utilizan los datos derivados de los instructores de campo y administradores de la India, y de los estudiantes mismos. El trabajo de campo estaba enmarcado conceptualmente por el Bhabha's Tercer Espacio. Se concluye con implicaciones para las prácticas de trabajo social en el campo internacional.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.112 | 0.015 |
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".