Bibliographic record
Abstract
As social workers, we develop our own integrated social work theory and practice model to guide an ethical, accountable, and evidence-based approach to professional practice. This report describes my emerging model, a map-in-progress, developed over the course of my Master of Social Work degree and final practicum. My practice takes place in the territories of the Tla’amin Nation. In this report, I focus on social work in primary health care, grounded in a theoretical orientation of Just Practice, queer theory, and abolitionist theory. I describe four landmarks generated in the context of my practicum: i) interprofessional practice, ii) the clientpractitioner relational continuum, iii) equity-oriented health care, and iv) abolitionist social work. I present a series of process-oriented collages rooted in the tradition of arts-based inquiry as selfreflexive practice. This report serves as a tangible touchstone for my emerging practice and I offer it as a humble addition to social work scholarship and practice.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".