MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474560110 · doi:10.1057/9781137460585_15

Contesting the Curriculum: Counsellor Education in a Postmodern and Medicalising Era

2015· book-chapter· en· W2474560110 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tom Strong, Karen H. Ross, Konstantinos Chondros, Mónica Sesma‐Vazquez

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumIdentity (music)PostmodernismPedagogyMedical educationHealth carePolitical sciencePsychologySociologyMedicineLawAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What is required to become a good counsellor these days? Most answers start with mention of ethical and responsive relational and conversational skills. However, beyond this initial answer, consensus would be hard to find. Look beyond graduate programmes in counsellor education, to what counsellors are expected to do in their everyday practice, and different notions of good counselling become evident. Counsellors are increasingly regulated as health practitioners whose services are funded by healthcare finances (Grohol 2013; Hansen 2007). With such medically oriented changes in funding and regulation have come professional identity challenges (Eriksen and Kress 2006). Counselling’s professional organisations have been renaming themselves as counselling and psychotherapy associations to position their members to receive health system funding (for example from the Canadian Counselling Association to the Canadian Counselling and Psychotherapy Association; De Cicco 2007). Such changes, beyond but still relevant to the universities, may be factors that are changing counsellor education. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207