Thinking differently about ‘work’ and social inclusion for disabled people
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Paid employment is the primary marker of social inclusion. Welfare reform is encouraging disabled people to move from reliance on welfare to income from employment. For those with qualifications and skills new opportunities are emerging. For many, however, gaining access to and staying in employment is challenging. The proportion of disabled people in mainstream employment has plateaued at a level far below that for non-disabled people. The chapter examines two alternatives to paid employment for disabled people, which can offer the benefits of work without many of the difficulties of mainstream workplaces. First, social enterprises offer flexible and accommodating conditions of employment that recognise the complex challenges of impairment. Second, volunteering and creative arts can provide many of the personal and social benefits of paid employment and, through contributing something of social value, challenge dominant assumptions about the place of disabled people in society. Alternative forms of 'work', whilst not addressing the financial challenges faced by many, do offer possibilities of being valued and feeling included. The chapter draws on data and research evidence from Britain and Canada.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".