Bibliographic record
Abstract
English This article proposes that a critical examination of international placements is crucial in fostering the internationalization of social work without reproducing oppressive power relations. It presents a discussion of some of the reasons underlying students’ choice to undertake international placements as well as implications for research and teaching. French Cet article émet l’idée qu’un examen critique des placements internationaux est essentiel pour stimuler l’internationalisation du travail social sans reproduire les rapports de pouvoir oppressifs. Il présente en discussion certaines des raisons à l’origine des choix des étudiants d’entreprendre des stages à l’international ainsi que les implications pour la recherche et l’enseignement. Spanish Se propone que un examen crítico de los lugares de prácticas internacionales es crítico para fomentar la internacionalización del trabajo social sin reproducir relaciones opresivas de poder. Se examinan algunas de las razones que hay por debajo de la decisión de los estudiantes al elegir prácticas internacionales, así como algunas implicaciones para la investigación y la enseñanza.
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 | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".