Radical women in social work: A historical prespective from North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Many challenges that confront social workers today are similar to problems they have faced over the past century – inequality, poverty, unemployment, militarisation and armed conflict, and the challenges of refugee resettlement, to name a few. It is instructive for contemporary social workers to revisit this history and to determine if there are lessons to inform our current struggles.METHOD: This paper explores the issues faced and strategies employed by radical, politically active social workers, most of them women. These social workers had visions of social justice and were not afraid to challenge the status quo, often at very high personal costs. The radical social workers were expressly interested in social change that centred on social justice, women’s rights, anti-racism, international peace, and they worked in close alliance and solidarity with other progressive groups.CONCLUSIONS: This article highlights the work of five radical female social workers. Radical social workers were in the minority but they were extraordinarily active and made important contributions in the face of formidable challenges.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".