A "White Cross" Social Centre; an evaluative review of the Canadian Mental Health Association Social Centre in Vancouver, British Columbia, its origins and operation, 1959-1960
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1956 plans were begun for the establishment of a Social Centre sponsored by the Canadian Mental Health Association in Vancouver, B.C. as a special resource for former patients of mental hospitals. It was opened in 1959. This thesis makes an appraisal of the Social Centre, the relevance of its initial planning, and the quality of its first year of operation. Such a Social Centre is significant in social work because it demonstrates contributions from groupwork, casework and community organization while the setting is new enough to invite further experiment. This survey employs the following techniques: the study of records; interviews with staff members, volunteers, and workers in related fields; and comprehensive interviews with a selected group of Social Centre members. This study (a) confirms that careful preliminary planning, based on a study of needs, resources, and on evaluations of similar projects in other cities, substantially aided the experiment in achieving its aims. It is evident (b) that a professionally-trained social worker, with a knowledge of groupwork techniques and a knowledge of resources in the community was of value in setting up this service; and finally, (c) that the members themselves, given encouragement, can take much of the responsibility for the operation of the Centre. Continuing needs include (a) a broadening of membership to other categories than the present ones, (b) more centres to serve other districts, and (c) the co-operation of such allied agencies as neighborhood houses, "Y's", etc.
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 | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".