MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004033989 · doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcz169

Cross-Cultural Social Work: A Critical Approach to Teaching and Learning to Work Effectively across Intersectional Identities

2019· article· en· W3004033989 on OpenAlexaff
Corry Azzopardi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe British Journal of Social Work · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologySocial competenceMandateCultural competenceIntersectionalitySocial workSocial justicePedagogySocial learningSocial psychologySocial changePsychologySocial scienceGender studiesPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract All relationships in social work education and practice constitute sites of cross-cultural exchanges. In keeping with the profession’s social justice mandate and anti-oppressive principles, it is fundamental for emerging social workers to begin the life-long learning process of developing a congruent composite of awareness, values, knowledge and skills essential for working effectively across diverse social locations and intersectional identities. Grounded in a social justice framework, this article engages critically with the concept of cultural competence in social work pedagogy, explores the significance of diversity and intersectionality in social work education and proposes a multidimensional model for teaching, learning and evaluating cross-cultural sensitivity and responsivity in the social work class-room.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.002
Science and technology studies0.0300.135
Scholarly communication0.0240.020
Open science0.0050.022
Research integrity0.0060.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations42
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe British Journal of Social WorkSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207