MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134734761 · doi:10.1080/10428232.2015.1063410

The Contradiction of Helping: Inuit Oppression(s) and Social Work in Nunavut

2015· article· en· W2134734761 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Progressive Human Services · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaArcticNet
KeywordsOppressionPrivilege (computing)CapitalismPower (physics)ContradictionSocial justiceState (computer science)SociologySocial workWork (physics)Political scienceEconomic JusticePolitical economyGender studiesEconomic growthLawPoliticsEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant differences in privilege, material resources, and decision-making power exist between Inuit and Qallunaat (or non-Inuit) in Canada’s Nunavut Territory. Holding serious implications, the disproportionate advantages afforded Qallunaat require an examination of the relationship between social work and the State (as employer). The role of credentialism and professionalism in the maintenance of neocolonial relations reveals a professional paradox and a barrier to pursing the objective of social justice within the profession. The transition experienced by Inuit—from a predominantly hunting culture to the logic of industrial capitalism—necessitates an examination of the role Qallunaat social workers have played and continue to practice within this transition and in the institutional structures that protect their interests.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.557
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.311 · 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