Interrogating settler social work with indigenous persons in Canada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary This article, towards decolonizing social work, reports on a study that examined the record of Canadian social work regarding Indigenous Canadians through the lens of the national professional association's journal. Noting that the broad dataset of over 1,500 journal articles represents legitimized knowledge within the discipline, the study aimed to develop a history of the present to interrogate the discourses relating to such practice. The study involved an analysis of the contents over the life of the journal from 1932 to 2019. Findings The study found that minimal attention was given to Indigenous issues in Canadian social work, only 30 articles touching on Indigenous issues directly. These articles portray contrasting discourses on Indigenous subjectivities and social work responses, reflecting conflicting perspectives in social work. Applications These observations should inform the interrogation of contemporary social work practice in Canada regarding its positionality in relation to Indigenous persons. Further, it should contribute to forging social work's future in recognizing the injustices and challenges accompanying its colonial history and present.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it