A Qualitative Course-Based Inquiry into the Concept of Love as a Central Component of Child and Youth Care Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Child and Youth Care (CYC) students have the right to be engaged in pedagogical practices that inspire and arouse their curiosity about their field of practice. Undergraduate course-based research in which students have an opportunity to conduct authentic research within a for-credit course is one such high-impact pedagogical practice with a growing body of evidence-based outcomes. This article presents an undergraduate course-based research project that examined child and youth care student‘s beliefs about displaying love as a component of their practice. Located in the constructivist/interpretive research paradigm, this course-based research project collected data through the use of an expressive arts-based data method followed by a semi-structured questionnaire. Four overarching themes were identified during the thematic analysis: (a) authentic caring involves expressions of love, (b) expressions of love are an essential component of growth and development, (c) loving care as an ethic of relational practice, and (d) but…professionalism stands in the way. The results of this course-based study suggest that expressing love as a component of relational-centred CYC practice is not fully understood by CYC students and that much more research is needed to explore this issue.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".