MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115931349 · doi:10.1080/14623943.2014.883312

Playing hide-and-seek: searching for the use of self in reflective social work practice

2014· article· en· W2115931349 on OpenAlexaff
Todd Adamowich, Martha Kuwee Kumsa, Cristine Rego, Jill Stoddart, Rosemary Vito

Bibliographic record

VenueReflective Practice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrivilege (computing)NarrativeReflective practicePower (physics)Self-reflectionSocial workPsychologyQualitative researchDiversity (politics)CurriculumCritical reflectionReflection (computer programming)Work (physics)Social psychologySociologyPedagogySocial scienceComputer sciencePsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increasing awareness of power and privilege in current theorizing, social workers are increasingly called upon to engage in critical self-reflection and develop strategies of reflective use of self in their practice. However, despite this call the use of self is disappearing from social work curricula. This paper presents an overview of findings from a small qualitative study exploring the use of self among reflective social work practitioners. In-depth collegial conversations were used to generate data. Narrative and discourse analysis were used to interpret the data. Findings are nuanced and textured reflecting the diversity of participants’ worldviews.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.034
Scholarly communication0.0100.017
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReflective PracticeSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207