MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021564837

Solidarity and Heart - The Development of Structural Social Work: A Critical Analysis

2018· article· en· W3021564837 on OpenAlex
Walter Wai Tak Chan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Social Work · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolidaritySociologyMarxist philosophyWork (physics)VotingSocial changeSocial structureEpistemologyPositive economicsPolitical sciencePolitical economyEconomicsLawPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A politically progressive approach to social work is the structural approach. Based on a Marxist perspective, structural social work seeks to create a welfare state built upon socialist principles. This paper described historical antecedents of structural social work in Canada, including the circumstances around its emergence in the 1970s and 1980s. I discussed recent developments and explored its possible future. Throughout the article, a critical lens is applied elucidating the structural approach’s strengths as well as shortcomings. I found that structural social work highlighted a moral dichotomy between the social worker’s conscience and the demands of our capitalist society, and advocated a definite need to mobilize voting for progressive candidates in elections. The shortcomings of the structural approach included an Euro-American centric bias, a weak potential as a decolonizing discourse, and its lack of an ecological imagination.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0120.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.369 · 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