MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285677193 · doi:10.1080/01609513.2022.2101820

The value of an online group for teaching group work skills

2022· article· en· W4285677193 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Work With Groups · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsVancouver Island University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroup workJournaling file systemPsychologyContext (archaeology)Support groupCurriculumExperiential learningPedagogyMathematics educationMedical educationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines third year social work students’ perceptions of the value of a mandatory, self-help online support group for teaching group work skills. Students overwhelmingly identified the group’s worth as lying in the mutual support received. They also felt that participating in a live group fostered the translation of group work theory and skills into a concrete environment. Experiential group work is the foundation of group work pedagogy in face-to-face classroom settings. This research suggests that this experience can be meaningfully replicated in a virtual context. Other course activities such as journaling and formal reflection and assessment of group process and dynamics support the integration of group work knowledge and skills promoted through the group experience. It is thus a teaching strategy that instructors of online group work courses might incorporate in the course curriculum.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it