Bibliographic record
Abstract
The declining prominence of anti-racist practice in social work education is a cause for concern in a profession premised upon pursuing social justice and serving humanity. This need calls for a revival of anti-racism education within the curriculum of social work education. This paper begins with an exploration of anti-racism discourse and guiding theory and examines the shift from anti-racism to anti-oppressive practice (AOP) in social work education and associated critiques and implications. Challenges to pursuing anti-racism education are identified as it pertains to implementing anti-racism education standards, and the teaching and learning of anti-racism from the perspectives of both educators and students. Finally, recommendations for policy revision and opportunities to engage faculty and students in anti-racism practice in social work education programs are proposed. Though predominately focused on the Canadian context, this exploration holds relevant and critical implications for the wider global context.
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 | 0.018 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.069 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".