The Settlement House Movement Revisited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Settlement House Movement is perceived as a major influence on the emergence of the social work profession globally. Yet, historical research on this movement in social work, and in particular, the transnational translation of this idea, is very limited. This volume sheds new light on the establishment of settlement houses in diverse societies, the interface between this Movement and other social movements, and the impact that it had on the social work profession, its values, practices and research. The chapters in the book explore the settlement house phenomenon in the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, Canada, France, Portugal and Mandatory Palestine and the individuals and groups that played a major role in their establishment. They underscore both the ways in which the international Settlement House Movement developed, the commonalities between settlement houses across the globe, and also the differences that emerged between them. In particular, it seeks to highlight the various motivations and sources of belief and knowledge of settlement founders, the goals that they sought, the contexts in which they worked, the activities they undertook and the populations which they served. The critical and transnational historical perspective adopted by the authors of the case studies in the path-breaking book provides the reader with a more subtle understanding of the complexities of the Settlement House Movement and its impact on the social work profession.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".