Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article maps various conceptualizations of the self and praxis in child and youth care theory. With specific reference to the curriculum and pedagogy developed at the School of Child and Youth Care at the University of Victoria, the shift from the knowledge, skills, self (KSS) model to the praxis framework is argued to exemplify a move to a more dynamic and politically nuanced rendering of the concept of the self relative to its more canonical expressions. The canonical self of CYC is proposed here as an aggregate of the writings of a small group of CYC theorists that together constitute the dominant conceptualization of the self in the field’s literature. Historical and philosophic context is provided for the articulation of the self in the canonical literature and a brief review of this literature is provided. The concept of politicized praxis builds on White’s (2007) Praxis Framework, as well as the work of other CYC theorists and practitioners (e.g., de Finney, Dean, Loiselle, & Saraceno, 2011; Gharabaghi & Krueger, 2010; Skott-Myhre & Skott-Myhre, 2011), to propose an avenue of theoretical development that might more adequately respond to the realities and experiences of diverse children, youth, and families. As a review this paper critically reflects on CYC’s theoretical traditions; as an opening gambit it proposes a way forward in theorizing a praxis that is responsive to the realities of contemporary society.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.111 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| 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".