Race, Resistance, and Restructuring: Emerging Skills in the New Social Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the introduction of the first neoliberal budgets in the mid-1980s, Canadian social service workers have had ample reason to resist changes in their work lives. Drawing on literature as well as on themes emerging from an intentionally diverse subset of data collected as part of a multiyear study, this article explores the resistance strategies of female, First Nations social workers and social workers of color in relation to changing work structures and power relations in their workplaces. Given their location in ethnically specific services and programs, racialized workers have been affected differently by restructuring and have, in turn, resisted these changes with different outcomes. Indeed, rather than the deskilling common to the sector, First Nations workers and workers of color have generated new, culturally sensitive practice skills. This article analyzes how the marginalized position of many workers of color and Aboriginal workers has shaped the kinds of resistance strategies they use within their paid and unpaid work in the restructured social services arena. The article explores the issue of unpaid work as an important but contradictory form of resistance among social workers. It concludes with suggestions for teaching and practicing in the new social services.
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 | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".