MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616965241 · doi:10.18357/jcs.v41i3.16303

Rethinking Common Practice in Child and Youth Care

2016· article· en· W2616965241 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ashley Do Nascimento

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Childhood Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpan (engineering)Life spanSociologyPsychologyGerontologyMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper deconstructs the dominant Western discourses of childhood innocence and dependence to better understand the importance of cultural contexts in child and youth care (CYC) work. It challenges dominant discourses as they relate to work in CYC settings cross-culturally. Exploring her personal experiences doing CYC work in a favela (slum) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, the author argues that CYC workers must be exible and re exive about the realities of the people with whom they work, or risk reifying the very issues they seek to address. In short, CYC workers can become part of the problem if they are not deeply aware of the ways they might reproduce these dominant discourses.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0270.119
Scholarly communication0.0240.019
Open science0.0050.029
Research integrity0.0070.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Childhood StudiesSame topicChildren's Rights and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207