MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403360558 · doi:10.1111/cfs.13233

‘Being a Social Worker … It's in My DNA’ Retaining Experienced Child and Family Social Workers: The Role of Professional Identity

2024· article· en· W4403360558 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Cook, Sara Carder, Danny Zschomler

Bibliographic record

VenueChild & Family Social Work · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas University
FundersBritish AcademyLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsSocial workIdentity (music)SociologyChild protectionPsychologySocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineNursingPolitical scienceLawPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The retention of experienced child and family social workers is a significant issue in the United Kingdom, the United States and Europe. Failure to retain experienced practitioners has serious implications for the protection and support of vulnerable children. Existing research and workforce interventions have focused on the support of early‐career social workers to prevent exit. Relatively few studies have examined what can be learned from experienced social workers who have remained in the profession long‐term. This study captures the voices of experienced stayers. Data consist of interviews with social workers ( n = 58) across 11 local authorities in England who have remained in practice for ≥8 years. Findings suggest that a strong sense of professional identity (PI) sustains social workers and promotes retention. For experienced social workers, staying in the profession long‐term involves navigating a series of identity challenges over the course of their career, conceptualized here as Critical Career Episodes (CCEs). Based on these findings, we suggest that retaining experienced social workers involves support to navigate CCEs alongside meaningful opportunities for learning and development. We identify three key factors that support and sustain ongoing PI development and support retention: generativity, specialism and mobility. The article concludes with recommendations to support workforce retention.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.337
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
Science and technology studies0.0090.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.325 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild & Family Social WorkSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207