On Trampled Ground: Unsettling Critical Social Work in Un/Sanctioned Safe Consumption Sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In her work, Rossiter (2011) considered the violence inherent in representation and called for a critical social work that is committed to an unsettled practice. In following Rossiter’s call to action , this article works to unsettle the trampled ground on which I walk to draw out the unsettled nature that is critical social work within the slippery and often unknowable parameters of grassroots and professional social work spaces. In utilizing my own experience in the unsanctioned Moss Park Overdose Prevention Site and the sanctioned Toronto Safe Consumption Site, I ask, What is critical social work? How is it tied to resistance and subversion? What happens when radical roots are co-opted by the state? In three sections, Grassroots, Professional, and Positionality, I assert that social work must always be unsettled in order to resist oppressive practices within. Using harm reduction and safe consumption services to discuss an unsettled practice, I conclude that social work must always be unsettled and continuously work to decentre itself
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 | 0.033 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.050 | 0.216 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.032 | 0.030 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.043 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".