The how of social justice education in social work: Decentering colonial whiteness and building relational reflexivity through circle pedagogy and Image Theatre
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
Teaching courses on social justice are mainstays of social work education and are considered imperative for ethically responsible social work practice. Social justice education comes with many challenges, including white settler student resistance and difficulties translating social justice content into social work practice. We suggest a move from viewing social justice practice as a value or skill set - as part of the ‘professional self’ – to one that understands social justice as relational and as a politics of being and acting. In this article, we discuss methods for decentering colonial whiteness in the social work classroom by adopting relational reflexive pedagogies more congruent with social justice content. The first half of the article focuses on the white and colonial epistemological foundations of social justice education in social work and notions of the social worker subjectivity as ‘good’ and ‘moral’. In the second half of the article, we invite social work educators to reflect on congruency between social justice theories discussed in the classroom and the practice of how we teach these concepts. We then offer circle pedagogy and Image Theatre exercises as examples of practicing a relational ethic and politic of social justice in the process of teaching.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it