STRUGGLE FOR INTEGRITY IN RESIDENTIAL CHILDREN’S HOMES: PROFESSIONAL SELF-ESTEEM AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT — PRACTICAL EXPERIENCES FROM HUNGARY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents an organizational development process — a therapeutic residential care model known as “Armchair” — that is based on qualitative experiences gained by the author in 10 years of practice, and that draws upon theories from child and youth care (CYC) and organizational psychology. The ideas described here have been implemented in several children’s homes in Hungary. Based on the premise that CYC is an autonomous applied science, the paper describes briefly the theoretical principles created from everyday practice in Hungary. It examines similarities between this model and the Cornell CARE model from the United States in relation to such aspects as the basic needs of children in residential care and the long-term orientation to building practice methods within agencies. A practical approach with a system-oriented perspective developed in Hungary for implementing the principles is presented. This includes a Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle model-quality assurance system designed to meet the needs of children, and furnishes an example of how information technology software can support the daily job of employees in terms of administrative and supportive activities. The article discusses weaknesses, threats, or challenges that can occur during implementation and threaten the program’s aims of helping both children and staff. This analysis uncovers the underlying role and importance of positive identity and self-esteem among staff, with a strong focus on personal and professional integrity. In conclusion, findings are presented that indicate some possible solutions for the problems discussed, comparing these qualitative results to previous quantitative evidence found in research studies measuring the effectiveness of the CARE model, and drawing some commonalities from the two approaches.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".