Examining the critically reflective approach and the use of self in practice with older adults living with mental ill-health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following advanced practicum document reviews my social work practice experience on both the In-Patient Psychogeriatric Unit as well as the Out-Patient Geriatric Behaviour Response Team within Grey Bruce Health Services (GBHS) hospital in Owen Sound, Ontario. Through the course of this practicum I was able to engage in various direct practice and assessment opportunities within both a medical and community setting. Through these opportunities I was able to engage in critical reflective practice and examine my use of self within a therapeutic setting with older adults, living with dementia. A comprehensive literature appraisal was conducted in order to demonstrate the rationale and increased need for working with the older adult population. As well, it highlighted the role that critical reflection of self plays within ethical social work practice, and details the positive and challenging nature in engaging in this form of reflective practice. This document goes on to detail various aspects of my advanced practicum experiences and the opportunities I was afforded at GBHS. During my time with both the in-patient and outpatient teams, I was able to work within a multidisciplinary, medical team setting. This in turn, provided complex and unique lenses in relation to my practice reflections and the various dynamics of power between professional roles as well as with client and their families. Lastly this document reflects on my own personal journey through the course of this advanced practicum and how it in turn has enhanced my personal life, social work practice and clinical assessment skills.
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 | 0.056 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; 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".