Disability, Professional Unsuitability and the Profession of Social Work: A Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evaluation of student conduct and suitability during professional training is critical to ensuring that the profession is promoting its values, protecting the public, clients and practitioners, and providing good and valuable service. However, a factor such as the presence of a student's mental disability can present significant challenges in this regard. This paper considers the challenges related to students who may be unsuitable for the profession of social work because of a mental disability. In addition we reference human rights laws and their interpretation as they relate to the rights of students with disabilities and consider the application of human rights principles to faculties of social work given their duty to accommodate students with disabilities. We use a case study that involves a practicum student, his placement, his disability, and the breach of ethics that led to him failing the practicum. We illustrate the connection between his disability, the breach of ethics and human rights obligations that apply in this case as well as consider possible resolutions.
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 | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".