MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081957931 · doi:10.5175/jswe.2006.200303153

RETHINKING REFLECTIVE PRACTICE EDUCATION IN SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION: A BLENDED CONSTRUCTIVIST AND OBJECTIVIST INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN STRATEGY FOR A WEB-BASED CHILD WELFARE PRACTICE COURSE

2006· article· en· W2081957931 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

VenueJournal of Social Work Education · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObjectivismFormative assessmentSocial constructivismConstructivism (international relations)Social workInstructional designPedagogyReflective practiceTeaching methodPsychologyConstructivist teaching methodsMathematics educationSociologyEngineering ethicsEpistemologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reports on the findings of a formative evaluation of an online competency-based child welfare practice course, paying particular attention to the instructional design principles and features required to promote the learning and enhancement of skill sets for reflective anti-oppressive social work practice. The article begins by differentiating the major forms of instructional design along two main dimensions—objectivism and constructivism—and examines the application of constructivism to the instructional design principles and teaching strategies of the online course. It concludes with the findings of the evaluation and a discussion of the pedagogical implications for social work education.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.352 · 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