Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intent of this article is to follow deconstruction as a way to think about the questions that are currently being asked in Child and Youth Care (CYC). As a graduate student in the School of Child and Youth Care at the University of Victoria (SCYC), I am challenged to think my position and identity in terms of my location within, or on the borders of, a CYC community. In this article I bring together deconstruction and contemporary issues in CYC to propose a way forward in terms of conceptualizing CYC identities. The first part of this follows deconstructive thinking through an analysis of CYC as a context and the practice of “contextualizing” in CYC. The second movement of the article weaves in the notions of community, community identities, tradition(s) and relationships to demonstrate how linguistic representations may limit our possibilities for theory and practice. I end by proposing hospitality (Derrida, 2000 Derrida , J. ( 2000 ). Hospitality . Journal of the Theoretical Humanities , 5 ( 3 ), 3 – 18 .[Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar]) as a way to negotiate the borders of CYC and open toward a “Child and Youth Care To-Come.” This article is specifically engaged with the conversations sparked at the Child and Youth Care in Action III Conference and the subsequent special issue of the International Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies, 3(2-3). I situate this critical analysis within the current conversations of my local CYC community and explore how deconstruction can help to open our community to its own future.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".