The experience of transnational social workers in England: some findings from research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The notion of the transnational social worker (TSW) is not uncommon as international labour mobility has become a feature of social work just as it has in many other occupations. The experiences of this group of workers, until recently under-theorised, has lately received attention as a result of virtually simultaneous research projects examining this aspect of social work experience in England, Australia, Canada and New Zealand (see, eg, Hanna and Lyons [2016], Harrison [2013] and Bartley et al [2012], respectively). England has been a receiving country for TSWs for many years, and as a dominant economy, it has managed the immigration of this group to suit its own local labour supply needs. Over the past decade or so, this workforce has been used primarily as reserve labour to fill gaps in local child protection services. The findings forming the basis of this chapter derive from a qualitative study exploring the experiences of TSWs in South-East England. Interviews conducted from 2011 to 2012 focused on the post-arrival, integration, professional practice and development of 28 TSWs from six countries working in statutory child and family services in London and the Home Counties who had been in the UK for five years or less. The results from this study demonstrate that while social work may now be a global profession with a common definition and set of professional social work standards (IFSW, 2016), it is far from a common professional project (Weiss-Gal and Welbourne, 2008). The local character of social work, rooted in the historical developments and current manifestations of national welfare systems and the cultural norms of a given society, remains a commonly accepted conception of social work practice. Previously published findings from this study have demonstrated that transnational experience presents social workers with a challenging emotional and cultural transition on both professional and personal levels (Hanna and Lyons, 2016). Using the theoretical framework of professional adaptation, understood as ‘the changes that occur in social workers in response to the new cultural and organisational environments in which they undertake their work’ (Pullen Sansfaçon et al, 2013, p 3), allows this chapter to explore other views of the data, showing that English conceptions of social work significantly challenge fundamental understandings of the professional values and practice held by many TSWs who work in England.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".