MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093202858

Challenging Assumptions: Using Research to Evaluate Child Welfare Worker Qualifications

2018· dissertation· en· W3093202858 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kristen Lwin

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWelfareLabour economicsPsychologyData sciencePolitical scienceEconomicsComputer scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Child welfare workers are the conduit between child welfare systems and children and their families. Required qualifications for practice include certain educational and practice experiences, skills, and knowledge. The overall goal of this dissertation is to increase understanding of the child welfare workforce. To meet this goal, the objectives of this dissertation are: 1) to assess the evidence for the necessary education and training qualifications required for child welfare practice; 2) to examine how worker qualifications have shifted in response to changes in child welfare system mandates and child and family needs; and 3) to contribute to the understanding of the role worker characteristics play in the ongoing services provision. Three studies were undertaken to meet the goal of this dissertation. The first paper is a synthesis of a portion of the child welfare workforce literature and reveals a lack of evidence regarding the specific educational background, skills, and experience that best equip child welfare workers for the demands of practice. Paper two is the first provincial study in Canada to examine how the profile of workers who conduct child maltreatment investigations has changed alongside shifts in child welfare legislation and mandate. Ontario data over the past 20 years illustrate changes in caseload size, training attendance, pre-service education, ethnicity, and years of child welfare worker experience. Paper three, the final study of this dissertation, uses multilevel analyses to examine the decision to transfer a family for ongoing services. Findings reveal that clinical and organizational characteristics predict this service provision, whereas worker characteristics (i.e., education, training attendance, experience, age, position, caseload size) did not. Overall findings suggest that there is little empirical evidence to suggest that valued qualifications actually equip workers with the skills and knowledge for effective child welfare practice and that the efficacy of these qualifications are based primarily on assumptions. Recommendations for future research and practice are provided.

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 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)0.005
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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.303
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.298 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207