British social work and the classless society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preoccupied and focused, as it is, on the lives of some of the most vulnerable and deprived people in British society, social work ought to be ideally placed to comment upon John Major’s claims that we are moving towards a classless society. Not only is the vast majority of its clients drawn from some of the most deprived and vulnerable segments of the working classes, this has been the traditional and principal domain of social work activity since its inception with the Charity Organisation Society (COS) in 1869. Social workers are involved with poor people, whatever other welfare label they may carry -such as people with special needs, elderly or lone parents. This has always been so. Social workers have a location and history which enables them to comment with some experience on class dynamics, inequality and social polarisation. As two Canadian social-work academics noted, this is true for social workers throughout the world: ‘Social work is a profession that operates in almost every society across the world; and every day hundreds or thousands of social workers in each of these societies are dealing with some aspect or manifestation of poverty’ (Larochelle and Campfens 1992:105).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".